ML062790355: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
(StriderTol Bot change)
 
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)
Line 18: Line 18:


=Text=
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:July 22, 2003 EA-03-105 NOTE TO: Frank J. Congel, OE Dennis Dambly, OGC Cindy Pederson, DRS FROM: Chuck Weil, EICS  
{{#Wiki_filter:July 22, 2003 EA-03-105 NOTE TO:         Frank J. Congel, OE Dennis Dambly, OGC Cindy Pederson, DRS FROM:           Chuck Weil, EICS


==SUBJECT:==
==SUBJECT:==
Line 24: Line 24:


==Attachment:==
==Attachment:==
as stated cc w/atch.      B. Berson, Rill P. Louden, Rill J. Creed, Rill T. Madeda, Rill J. Luehman, OE J. Dixon-Herrity, OE J. Longo, OGC R. Paul, OI:RIII M. K. Fahey, 01 G. West, NSIR OE:EA CONTACT:        Charles H. Weil (630 810-4372 NOT FOR PUBI C RELEASE WITHOUT THE A %ROVAL OF THE DIRE        OR, OFFICE OF ENFORCEM              T Information in this record was deleted in accordance wit1tthe Freedom of )'forratoi0 OArL Act, exemRtions      ...                .
BEFORE THE UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION IN RE THE MATTER OF:                                            )
Pre-Decisional Enforcement Conference                          ) CONFIDENTIAL Nuclear Management Company, LLC,                                )
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION HEARING July 16, 2003 9:00 o'clock A.M.
PROCEEDINGS HAD and testimony taken before                            the UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION,                            taken at the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission,                            Region III, 801 Warrenville Road,            Lisle,          Illinois,    before Jeffrey D.
Stupak, .C.S.R.      No. 084-004188,              a Notary Public qualified and commissioned for the State of Illinois.
PRESENT FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION:
MS. CYNTHIA PEDERSON,                  Director,  Division of Reactor Safety; MR. JIM DYER,        Regional Administrator; MR. CHARLES WEIL, Enforcement/Investigation Coordination Staff; MR. BRUCE BERSON,            Regional Counsel; MR. JAMES CREED,            Safeguards        Program Manager; MS. JENNIFER DIXON-HERRITY, Enforcement Specialist, Office of Enforcement; MS. MARY KAY FAHEY,                Investigator;
                *JCcR                                    1h County Court Reporters, Inc.
County View Centr,    Suits 200 600 South County Ydrm Road Oak Brook Office                  Wheton. lUina      60187              Zanie County Office (630) 654-1121              (630) 6331622 - FAX (630) 653-4139            (630) 897.8852
2 1 PRESENT FOR THE NRC:      (Continued) 2            MS. GIOVANNA LONGO;        Investigator; 3            MR. PATRICK LOUDEN,        Branch Chief, Reactor Projects        Branch 5.
4 MR. TERRY MADEDA,      Physical          Security 5                    Inspector; 6            MR;  GARMON WEST,      Security        Specialist; 7
8 PRESENT FOR NUCLEAR MANAGEMENT            COMPANY,        LLC:
9 10              MR. THOMAS COUTU, Site Vice President, Kewaunee Nuclear Power Plant; 11 MR. JONATHAN ROGOFF,        Vice President            and 12                    Counsel, NMC; 13              MR. GORDON ARENT, Manager Regulatory Affairs,  Kewaunee Nuclear Power Plant; 14 MR. ALDO CAPRISTO, Manager,                Employee 15                    Concerns, NMC; 16              MR. RANDALL CLEVELAND, Manager, Access Authorization and FFD,                  NMC; 17 MR. DAN CRAFT,    Investigator,            NMC; 18 MR. GARY VAN MIDDLESWORTH,              vice president, 19                    NMC; 20              MR. HAL WALKER,    Consultant; 21              MR. EDWARD WEINKAM,        director        of regulatory services.
22 COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL.            (630)      653-1622
3 1          MS. PEDERSON:        Good morning,    I'm Cindy Pedersen, 2 I'm the director of the Division of Reactor Safety 3 here in      Region III.        This meeting is    a predecisional 4  enforcement        conference with the Nuclear Regulatory 5 Commission and Nuclear Management Company.                    It  does 6 pertain to apparent violations              concerning 7  deliberately failing to execute the fitness for duty 8  program and provide complete              and accurate information 9  at the Kewaunee facility.              This meeting is      closed to 10  public observation,            but as-our policy we are 11  transcribing this because it              does deal with 12  potentially        willful violations;      therefore,      I would 13  ask that you all            use the microphone,    that  it    will be 14  on if      the little      green light is  on,  and ask that you 15  speak loudly so the transcriptionist                is  able to fully 16  hear everything,            as well as those participants on our 17  video conference.            In  a few minutes I'll    talk about 18  today's agenda,          but I'd  like to start    with 19  introductions,          first    for the NRC and then Nuclear 20  Management      Company.
21                          Jim?
22          MR. DYER:      I'm Jim Dyer,    Regional Administrator, COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)        653-1622
1 Region III.
2      MR. BERSON:    Bruce Berson,  Regional    Counsel.
3      MR. LOUDEN:    I'm Pat Louden,  DRP Branch ChiE 4 Region III.
5      MR. WEIL:    Charles Weil,    Enforcement    Special 6 Region III.
7      MS. DIXON-HERRITY:      Jennifer Dixon-Herrity, 8 with the Office of Enforcement,        Headquarters.
9      MR. MADEDA:    Terry Madeda,  Region III    Kewaun 10 Security Inspector.
11      MR. CREED:    Jim creed,    Region III,    Safeguard 12 Program Manager.
13      MS. PEDERSON:    NRC observers,  please?
14      MR. NEURAUTER:      I'm Jim Neurauter,    Region II 15      MR. PERGANDE:    Shaun Pergande,    engineering 16 group.
17      MS. BOND:    Jamie Bond,  nuclear safety inspec 18      MS. MELENDEZ:      Danada Melendez.
19      MR. PAUL:    Rich Paul,  01.
20      MS. FUNK:    Dawn Funk,  physical  security 21 inspector.
22      MS. PEDERSON:      And headquarters,    please?
COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)    653-1622
5 1        MS. LONGO:    Giovanna Longo,    Office of General 2  Counsel.
3          MS. FAHEY:    Mary Kay Fahey,    Office of 4  Investigations.
5          MR. SUPUNSIS:    NSIR.
6          MR. WEST:  'Garmon  West,  NSIR.
7          MS. LONGO:    This is  Ginny Longo.      We don't see 8  you on the camera through your end.            Is  that 9  purposeful,    or are you not aware of that?
10        MS. PEDERSON:    We are taking care of that.
11  Thank you,    Ginny.
12        MS. LONGO:    Thanks.
13        MR. LOUDEN:    How's that?
14        MS. LONGO:    Thank you very much.
15        MS. PEDERSON:    For NMC,    please?
16        MR. ROGOFF:    I'm Jonathan Rogoff,      NMC in-house 17  counsel.
18        MR. COUTU:    Tom Coutu,    Kewaunee Nuclear Plant, 19  site  vice president.
20        MR. CLEVELAND:    Randy Cleveland,      NMC access 21  manager.
22        MR. CAPRISTO:    Aldo Capristo,    fleet    employee COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)      653-1622
USNRC REGION III ORMA    5302101U10 OB/2S/2005  12 :22 6
1          concern program manager.
2                MR. WALKER:    Hal Walker,    I'm an investigative 3          consultant.
4                MR. PICKENS:    Terry Pickens,      director of 5          government affairs,      NMC,  Hudson.
6                      ARENT:    Gordon Arent,      regulatory affairs
                    -~    -MR.
                                                                                                      ~i manager,* Kewaunee.
8                MR. WEINKAM:    Edward Weinkam,      director of 9          regulatory services.
10                  MR. VAN MIDDLESWORTH:      Gary VanMiddlesworth, 11          vice president,      assessments,    for NMC.
12                MR. CRAFT:    Dan Craft,  with Nuclear Management 13          Company.    -*
14                MS. PEDERSON:    Thank you.                                              I 15                              The purpose of today's meeting is                to 16          gather additional      information for us to make our 17          enforcement decision.        As the title      implies, 18          "predecisional enforcement        conference" means we have 19          not yet made that decision.          It's    very important I
20          today that we fully understand your perspective                    of 21          the facts of the case and any additional thoughts you 22          may have about enforcement.
COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)        653-1622                  4
1                    Briefly I will go over the agenda.
2  After I    have concluded my opening remarks,          Chuck Weil 3  will briefly      discuss the enforcement policy.          We are 4  operating under a traditional        enforcement    policy in 5  this regard.
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 COUNTY COURT REPORTERS,    INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD.,  WHEATON,  IL.  (630) 653-1622
8 I                      Somewhat unique in      this particular 2 case is      in  our-June  9th letter    we also specifically 3 asked that you address any potential              chilling effect 4 at other NMC facilities          since some of the individuals 5 in    Kewaunee that were involved in          the fitness for 6 duty issue were denied access at Point Beach.
7                      Finally,  I encourage you and your 8 staff    to present anything else that you feel is 9 relevant      to our decision.
10                        I am sure you've probably had an 11  opportunity to review the enforcement policy again; 1.2 as such,      anything that may factor into decisions          on 13  civil    penalties,    if  any,  we would also like to hear 14  your perspective.
15                        Following your presentation and any 16  questions      that we may have,      we will take a short 17  break.      When we reconvene we may have a few 18  follow-along questions.          Following that,    Chuck Weil 19  will summarize where we go next as far as the formal 20  process is      concerned. And lastly,    Jim Dyer will 21  provide closing remarks.
22                        I will note that we will be making no COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)    653-1622
1 final decisions during this        meeting,    so we will r 2  be presenting anything of that nature.
3                    Before we continue,      I'd  like to ju 4  comment on what the significance of what we're he 5  to discuss today.      As you know,    the NRC considers 6  potential  deliberate violations very seriously.
7  addition to the potential of this case of having 8  unfit individual    on site,    the potential here is      t 9  a supervisor deliberately failed to take action a 10  then later  potentially lied about his knowledge.
11  And,  obviously,  that is    not acceptable.      Our 12  regulatory framework relies      on individuals to con 13  with our requirements      in  a trustworthy manner.        I 14  somebody violates that trust      it does shake the 15  foundation of our regulatory framework and cannot 16  tolerated.
17                    With that,    John or Tom,    any openin 18  remarks you would like to make?
19        MR. COUTU:  I do have some opening remarks 20  before we begin the presentation,        but let    me begi 21  with the fact that we at Kewaunee        and NMC take 22  fitness for duty,    access authorization,        employee COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)      653-1622
1 concerns      and safety conscious work environment v(
2  seriously.
3                        This has been a long and difficult 4  investigation.          We still,      coming into this 5  conference,      are not clear on the exact nature of 6  violations,      so we will present to you a purpose, 7  we believe      is  the purpose for our meeting today 8  then our objectives.              As I have said this      has beE 9  difficult      issue for us to pin down.              There are  --
10  there's      very little      in    the way of hard facts.        Mc 11  of the information that we have has been the resv 12  of interviews with numerous people.                    Conflicting 13  statements      have been made.            We have had very much 14  a lot of difficulty          corroborating        statements that 15  individuals have made.              So,  were we forced to dra 16  conclusions based on what we believed to be the w 17  reasonable      sequence of events that occurred and %
18  intend to show that to you today,                how we came to 19  conclusions we did based on the information that 20  had..
21                        We hope that this can be a very op 22  exchange of information.              Our goal here is      really COUNTY COURT REPORTERS,          INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD.,        WHEATON,  IL.  (630) 653-1622
1 get to the right conclusion and not to defend onE 2  position or another.        So if  the NRC is      in  possesE 3  of information    that we do not have,        we hope to ol 4  that information today.        And if    our course of act 5  need to be changed,      we will in    fact change our cc 6  of actions.
: 7.                    So with that,    I'd  like to just,    if 8  nobody has any questions,        move into the presentat 9        MS. PEDERSON:    Okay.
10        MR. COUTU:    Oh,  also,  this can get complicat 11  from a names and positions perspective,            so if  you 12  would,    we've prepared just a little        chart of who' 13  who as far as folks that were involved initially 14  the concerns and folks that we talked to and feel 15  that we will be speaking about today in            our 16  presentation.
17        MS. PEDERSON:    What I would suggest is        that 18  NRC participants    return this document        to you sinc 19  would be personal privacy information and I              would 20  that we return it      to you at the end of the meetin 21      MR. COUTU:    All right. It's    going to be tou 22  to keep track of everything for anybody who hasn' COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)      653-1622
12 1 been very familiar with this.
2            MS. PEDERSON:        I appreciate  that.
3            MR. COUTU:      Okay.
4                          Gordon?
5            MR. ROGOFF:      Before Tom begins,      it's      going to be 6  very difficult          to talk about this      without speaking 7  the names of some of these individuals                    so,  I mean,  I 8  think      we  --
9            MS. PEDERSON:        Right. My only point of that is 10  it    being a document          submitted to the agency,          you 11  know,      as part of this.          But you're right,        we will 12  that's      why it's    closed.      We will be talking personal 13  privacy and potential willful.
14            MR. COUTU:    Okay.
15                          So,  first    off I will cover the purpose 16  of    --  what  we believe        to be the purpose of this 17  enforcement conference,              our objectives.      And I will 18  also cover at a very high level              the results        of our 19  investigation.          I would ask that,      unless there's        a 20  real burning question at that point,                to kind of wait 21  on questions until Mr.              Randy Cleveland makes his 22  presentation on the details of the investigation.
COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)            653-1622
13 1      MS. LONGO:    This is    Ginny Longo. I have to 2  interrupt    you,  I'm sorry,    just to ask. You all    were 3  going to fax something,      it  hasn't come. Is  there a 4  problem?    I understand part of your presentation            is 5  writing and we were going to be faxed a copy;            is    that 6  correct?
7        MR. MADEDA:    The fax should be on its      way.
8        MS. LONGO:    Okay.
9        MR. MADEDA:    Yeah,  there should be a second fax 10  also coming.
11        MS. LONGO:    Thank you.      Sorry.
12        MR. COUTU:    So,  Mr. Cleveland will present the 13  investigation details and then Mr.          Aldo Capristo will 14  present the potential effect or lack of potential 15  effect on safety conscious work environment.              During 16  the course of the investigation,        we did discover some 17  things that we did act upon.          We will be covering 18  those actions,    and Mr. Cleveland and Mr. Capristo 19  will in  fact lay those out for you.        And then I will 20  come back and wrap things up.
21                    Our purpose today,    we believe it      is    to 22  provide the NRC with facts that NMC investigations COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)      653-1622
14 1  revealed regarding allegation one,                which was that 2 welders      deliberately        followed the  --  failed      to report 3  fitness    for duty concerns;        and a contract mechanical 4  and civil        superintendent,      that would be'4; 5 failed to report a fitness              for duty concern involving 6 a foreman,        and that would be a Day & Zimmerman 7  foreman,      contract      foreman,  that would be*.
8                  or your chart;      to provide the NRC with 9  facts that NMC's investigations revealed regarding 10  allegation three,            which is  that a rontract mechanical 13  and civil        superintendent        again                      provided 12  false information to the NMC investigator relative to 13  being informed about the fitness for duty concern 14  involving        :he        LL11JAWAiV>fi95>
foreman,                      also,.)%J  to 15  provide,      the NRC insight from the NMC's evaluation of 16  potential        for chilling effects as a result              of the 17  actions      taken during our investigations              and to 18  provide our conclusion concerning potential 19  violations.
20                            Our objectives today are to show that 21  the NMC investigation was thorough and that our 22  conclusions were based on the facts,                and probably COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)            653-1622
15 1 more correctly based on reasonable            judgment 2 surrounding the information that we gained through 3 the interview process and several other fact-finding 4 initiatives        that we identified;    to demonstrate how we 5 carried out our fitness for duty obligations based on 6 the information *that he has obtained during the two 7 related investigations;          and to explain how NMC 8 maintained a safety conscious work environment 9 throughout the course          of the investigation and 10 afterwards and how we managed that.
11                        At a high level,  the results of the 12 investigation,        and then I'll  go over what the 13 original allegation was that was brought to our 14 attention that launched          into the investigation,      and 15 that was that a Day & Zimmerman NPS supervisor turned 16 their      heads when certain individuals come in        half 17 blitzed.        That was the original allegation.
18                        Due to the potential seriousness of 19 the issue,        wetretained the counsel of an independent 20 investigator,        actually the services of an independent 21 investigator, iWalker Consultants,          and that's    Mr. Hal 22 Walker at theiend of the table          (indicating),    he was COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.-
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)    653-1622
16 1 retained to complete a comprehensive            investigation of 2  this    incident.
3                    Our investigative efforts and 4  conclusions were summarized and reported to the NRC 5  in  a letter  dated February 8 of 2002.          There were 6  basically two investigations.        We had an initial 7  investigation and then a supplemental            investigation, 8  and we'll    go through the results    of those.
9                    The initial  investigation identified 10  four individuals who stated that on occasion they 11  perceived    the odor of alcohol on the breath of a Day 12  & Zimmerman foreman,      that would be' 13  while inside the Kewaunee protected area.              None of 14  the individuals    notified their    immediate supervisor 15  or other member of management        at the time that they 16  detected the odor of alcohol.        That is      the finding of 17  our investigation.
18                    All four individuals who detected the 19  odor of alcohol    on the breath of the Day & Zimmerman 7
20  forema' -1ere    aware of their responsibilities          to 21  report or act.
22                    And as a result,    during of course of COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)      653-1622
1 our investigation we uncovered some trustworthinE 2 and reliability      issues that led us to deny access 3 because the individuals did not report the odor c 4 alcohol      when they detected it. They basically fE 5 to support our fitness        for duty policy and reallj 6 gave us no indication that they would support thE 7 fitness      for duty policy.
8                      A supplementary investigation was 9 undertaken following communication by a concerned 10 individual to our,        to NMC employee concerns progi 11 That individual wished to provide us additional 12 information or observations relative          to the initi 13 investigation,      so we opened a supplemental 14 investigation to follow up on those.            This concer 15 individual provided two new elements of concern.
16 was related to the fitness for duty issue.            The o 17 element was related to welding issues and that ha 18 two parts.      We investigated,  we thoroughly 19 investigated the two elements        and neither of the 20 elements are substantiated.
21                      What we did find on the initial 22 allegation,      as a result  of both investigations,      i COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)  653-1622
18 1 that the concern was partially            substantiated. it 2 could not be concluded that the Day & Zimmerman 3 foreman was ever on the job unfit for duty.                We were 4 unable to conclude that.        It    was concluded that the 5 odor of alcohol was detected.              And,  in fact,  it  was 6 concluded    that the Day & Zimmerman superintendenA 7 failed to comply with our fitness for duty program by 8 not ordering a for-cause test            upon the detection of 9 an odor of alcohol.        And although he performed 10 additional behavioral observations              to ascertain 11 fitness for duty,      he did not act in        accordance with 12 our fitness    for duty policy which does require 13 for-cause testing.      It  was also not substantiated 14 that any welder reported,        initially      reported the odor 15 of alcohol to the immediate          supervisor or any member 16 of management.
17                    So,  again,  we do not'substantiate          the 18 allegation that the odor of alcohol had been reported 19 to the contract mechanical        and civil      superintendent, 20                  We did not conclude that the' contract 21 mechanical and-civil      superintendent provided 22 incomplete or inaccurate information.              We do not COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)        653-1622
19 1 believe    that a chilling effect had been created at an 2  NMC facility      as a result of this FFD issue or actions 3  that NMC has taken in        response to what we discovered 4  in    the course of our investigations.        And we do not 5  believe at this      time that any findings support 6  escalated enforcement.
7                      And with that,  I'd  like to turn it 8  over to Mr. Randy Cleveland to provide additional 9  detail    on what we discovered through the course of 10  our investigations.
11          MR. CLEVELAND:    Okay,  I'm going to highlight      the 12  NMC investigative findings        supporting our conclusion 13  that the superintendent,                    -wasnot 14  informed of anlcohol      ofO          on 15                      Our investigation    focused on five 16  welders,    each reporting    that they detected the odor 17  of alcohol on,                    and whether they reported 18  the odor of alcohol to the superintendent,
: 19.              Our investigation concluded that four of 20  the welders deliberately failed to report the odor of 21  alcohol.      This conclusion is    based on two primary 22  findings:      One,  that the welders    were adequately COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)  653-1622
20 1 trained on the expectation                to report FFD concerns; 2 and the second,          they provided specific        reasons for 3 not reporting the odor of alcohol                  to supervision.
4 And,  particularly,        that these reasons were provided 5 prior to their          notice by us of denial of access.
6                        The welders,      I'll  begin with 7 again provided specific reasons.                  He asked the 8 investigator,        Hal Walker,      to look at things        from his 9 point of view,          that as a 10 11 12                you didn't want to,            as he stated,    "Create 13 waves.      You kept your eyes open and your mouth shut."
14 That was the reason that                          gave for not going 15 forward with the odor of alcohol to supervision.
16                                    simply stated it      was not his 17 job to sniff        others.
18                      J          Istated      that supervision was 19 aware of                              drinking habits;      therefore, 20 there was no reason to report.                  And he was a fellow 21 worker.
22                        Finally,.                  simply stated he COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)          653-1622
21 1  feared union reprisal                as the basis for not reporting 2  the odor of alcohol              to
: 3.                          The tifth      welder having reported the 4  detection of alcohol                                          ultimately 5  found to be not credible.                  This was based on our 6  finding of contradictory                statements,    uncorroborated 7  claims and a threat that the individual made to 8                which we will detail a little              further in  the 9  presentation.
10                            Regarding      the first    area of concern, 11  with                        this is      the fifth  welder's 12  credibility        --
13            MR. COUTU:      Let me make sure you understand.
14  We're going to focus on the fifth                  welder because he 15  was the only individual who told us that he reported.
16  *The other individuals              clearly told us they did not 17  report.        So we are going to spend some time on this 18  individual        because we wanted to be sure that we 19  understood whether or not he in                    fact did or did not 20  report.      And that's        really important.
21            MR. CLEVELAND:          The first    area of concern with 22                  j      redibility      involved contradictory COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)          653-1622
22 1 statements he made to NMC investigators.                      The first 2  example      includes a statement        that he made on January 3  11,    2002,    stating that ýhe foreman,          !-
4  was loaded every morning,              and in  a subsequent 5  interview with NMC security on March 27 he made the
.6 statement that he didn't              know anything about the 7  foreman being drunk.
8                            The second example involves a random 9  testing      situation      wherein,  again on/      nuary 11,      202 10                      claims that he was escorted to the 11  collections          site  at Kewaunee    for a random test        bye.
12                  On March 27 of 2002,      in  a subsequent 13  interview again with NMC security,                he this      time 14  denies being escorted to the collection site                      by the 15  foreman,                      j 16                            Our third example of a contradictory 17  statement        concerns,    again,  a random collection 18  wherein                        alleges that the collector 19  performing the random drug and alcohol test 20  acknowledged the escort,,S                                  and again 21  these statements were made on January 11,                    2002 as "a 22  little    ripe."        This was in  response toj3 COUNTY COURT REPORTERS,    INC.
600 S. COUTY FARM RD.,    WHEATON,  IL.    (630)  653-1622
23 1  challenging      the collector as to why she was not 2  testing the messenger,            the escort,      ......
3                            In  an interview with NMC security on 4  June 12 of 2002,                            again reiterates        that 5                      j-as not at the collection              site    and this 6  time that when he challenged the collector regarding 7  why she wasn't testing the messenger,                  she appeared 8  puzzled and did not in            fact make such a statement, 9  appeared    "a    little      ripe."
10                            The second area of concern with 11    respect    to                        credibility      involved 12    uncorroborated          claims. We've got.three examples here 13    which I    would like to detail.
14"..                        The first    one involved 15    claim that che foremaniand a co-worker,=
16'  went through access control together and that one 17    hour later    the co-worker,                    ]was      for-cause 18    tested. Our review of test          records from-                    we 19    were only able to identify a random test                    in    y  2001 20    time frame.        There was no record at all              of a 21    for-cause    test      conducted o 22                            The second uncorroborated            claim ties COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)              653-1622
24 1    back to the previous contradictory point we covered 2    wherein Q*M              . -6 "claims the collector acknowledged 3    thelforeman                        s not fit  for duty. This 4    is    getting back to the "a little      ripe" statement.
5    Again                  ]claimed he was escorted by Mr.
6    Lto                the collection site,    that he challenged 7    the collector as to why she wasn't testing the 8    messenger,      and the messenger acknowledged,      yeah,  he's 9    "a little      ripe."
10                          We interviewed both of the collectors 11    that performed      random tests on                  in    y of 12 102 2001and neither of the collectors            could recal26 13                    escorting.              to the collection 14    site,              making any such statements    regarding 15    why they weren't        testing the messenger,    and neither 16    had any reason to ever question 17    fitness      for duty.
18                          The third example involves      a document 19    that.                  provided to us on June 12,      of twice-20    removed hearsay,      essentially a he-said-that-he-said-21    that-he-said.        The document alleging that the 22    superintendent,                      admitted to receiving COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)  653-1622
25 1  reports of the odor of alcohol                and lying to 2  investigators.
3                          Our follow up on this,          we immediately 4 re-interviewed                                              Background on 5 what    the document detailed,            it  detailed a 6 conversation betwee                            and              in which 7        *admits
                -,*                  t40      011`t    hat            aand Qlhad reported to him the smell of alcohol on 9                        and that                  ;lied      to NMC 10  investigators          regarding the same.            Our interview of ii                    ind                found both denied the 12  truthfulness of the document and neither acknowledged 13  that the statement              regarding anyone reporting the 14  odor of alcohol            to-      -was            made.
15                            The third area of concern regarding 16                    *cebility cre**            involves a statement he 17  made to the superintendent                                    in  June of 18  2001.      This was developed by Mr.            Dan Craft of my 19  staff.        Dan Craft was recently hired by us,                he's got 20  31 years of experience with the Federal Bureau of 21  Investigation,          he was a special agent and supervisor 22  in    character of investigations.                We commissioned Dan COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)            653-1622
26 1  to take a look at,      in  preparation for the enforcement 2  conference here,      the entire investigation that was 3  done,  all  that was conducted by Hal Walker and any 4  subsequent    investigations      that we conducted to 5  determine    whether it was comprehensive            and complete 6  and whether we needed to do additional              investigation.
7  One of the things that Dan found,              he identified the 8  need to go back and take a look at the employee file 9  01f                    We did that    and that's      where we 10  developed    the statements made to the superintendent.
12  Dan also did some re-interviewing              and some additional 12  interviews    and we are --      that  information      is 13  available.
14                      What Dan found in        the employee file      of is  evidence of a statement          that he made 16  in  June of 2001.                      had gone toQi 17  concerned that he should have been setup as the 18  foreman on the job.          He opinioned that the foreman, 19                      is  an idiot;    asserted,    this    i 20              asserted that he is        not going to burn rod 21  for the rest of his li-fe;        and finally,      he threatened 22  to "get even and when I do,          you people won't know COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)        653-1622
27 what hit        you."      This was documented to                  .    .      .
2 file    on June 26th of 2001.
3          MR. BERSON:      Could you explain how that 4 information got inton,                                    Ile?
5 reported it?
6          MR. CLEVELAND:            It  was iicM"              U      employee 7 file.        It  was a signed note of a memorandum of 8 meeting that        took place by          --  betweenad 9                    signed      by 10          MR. BERSON:      Okay.
11          MR. COUTU:      I  think it's        important here to note
" 12  that,    No. 1, we were not directed by anyone to go 13  look at this file.              It    wasn't like_                      said, 14  "go check his file."                  This was an independent piece.
15                          I  think the second piece,              that's 16  important to understand is                  the time frame in        which 17  this was entered,            which was before,            really,  any of 18  these allegations were claimed to have been made, 19  which was in        June 2001 time frame,              as opposed to 20  starting in        July.      This whole issue            started in    the 21  July 2001 time frame.                  So I  think those are important 22  things to understand about time frame and the fact COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)                  653-1622
28
'J    1  that no one directed us to go look for this.                        It  just 2  turned up in        our investigation.            We would have 3  probably treated          it    differently    ifihad                said, 4  "Well,    go look in        his file. There's something 5 there."      It's    a great question and,            you know,    we 6 considered        that.
7          MR. BERSON:        When di                    ign this 8  statement?
9          MR. CLEVELAND:          June 26,  2001.
  *10            MR. BERSON:        He signed it    prior to,      okay.
MR. CLEVELAND:          Correct.
12                          So,    in  summary,  with respect to the 13  fifth    welder,                        we ultimately        concluded 14  him to be not credible based on the reasons which I 15  just    articulated and were ultimately unable to 16  substantiate his claim that he had reported the odor 17  of alcohol        t 18                          In  conclusion,    NMC was unable to 19  substantiate that the welders had reported the odor 20  of alcohol to                            Again,      this  was based on 21  our finding that the four welders,                    again prior to 22  their    denial of access,          stated that they did not COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)              653-1622
29 1 provide    that information to supervision,        specifically 2 the odor of alcohol on              R          For the one 3 that did claim that he had reported the odor of 4 alcohol    to                  we spent a great deal of time 5 here detailing our investigative efforts          to 6 corroborate his claim and were unable,          ultimately 7 unable to do so based on our finding it          was not 8 credible, and our inability        to substantiate his 9 claims.
10      MR. COUTU:    I'd  like to ask Mr. Aldo Capristo to 11 talk a little    bit  about the issue that you asked us 12 to address which was potential        impacts on a chilled 13 work environment as a result of the actions taken 14 during this    investigation.
15      MR. CAPRISTO:      Good morning. As .I mentioned in 16 my introduction,      I  am currently the fleet    employee 17 concern program manager,        and I think relevant        to this 18 is  at the time these events unfolded        I was also 19 serving in    the capacity as employee concern program 20 manager for the Kewaunee facility,        so I was 21 integrally involved in        these issues as they unfolded.
22                    I have two central points.        First, COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)    653-1622
30 1  that NMC self-identified            the potential  for a chilling 2  effect within the Day & Zimmerman organization and we 3  took action to address the safety conscious work 4  environment          throughout    this period.
5                          Second,  I will explain our basis for 6  our conclusion that the Kewaunee              fitness for duty 7  issue did not create a chilling effect              at Kewaunee    or 8  other facilities.
9          MR. COUTU:      That is  a typo,  should be "did not."
10          MR. CAPRISTO:        "Did not create"    on the handout.
11  I think that's          substantial. Make sure to put that in 12  your notes.
13                          We based these conclusions on three 14  specific evaluations that are relevant to the time 15  period.      First,      a fleet life  safety cultural 16  assessment        that was conducted in      September 2001 which 17  is  directly        in  the period of time of interest.
18  Second,      a more specific concerns environmental 19  assessment      that was conducted within the Day &
20  Zimmerman working group within the Point Beach and 21  Kewaunee organization.
22                          And I  think at this  point it's COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)      653-1622
1  relevant to mention,        again,  it's  important    to 2  understand that this is            a migrating working grour 3    that these are not regular employees that support 4  and only one facility.            That as the work at KewaL 5  rolled up with the generator replacement project 6  *the fall      of 2001,  some of these employees then mc 7  over to Point Beach.            I believe that's      the basis 8  your concern that this may have had an impact bey 9  just      Kewaunee. So these employees do migrate bet 10  facilities.
11                        And third and final is      an evaluati 12  that we provided in        response to a previous NRC 13  request on this        topic.
14            MR. WEIL:    Could you explain to us how a 15  September      2001 assessment has to do with people t 16  are denied access in,          seemingly,    December some th 17  months later?        I don't understand its      relevance.
18  It's      beforehand.
19            MR. CAPRISTO:    I  think there's    a --  as we 20  understand the issue,          the issue was brought to ou 21  attention in      November that there was a potential 22  fitness for duty issue,          that there was an COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)      653-1622
32 1 unwillingness        to report,  whether it    was an unfit 2 person at the facility.            My understanding was that 3 this could have existed in          this prior time and I 4 believe we go back to the July 2001 time frame where 5 there were concerns ultimately unearthed there could 6 have been unfit employees,          that 7  specifically        may have been unfit as early as July 8 2001.
9          MR. WEIL:      Let me be a little    more explicit.        I 10  think the potential          chilling effect    question we are II  asking is,    ,after    these gentlemen.raised        the issue of 12  the fitness        for duty issue and I believe circa 13  December,    maybe,    2001,  to potentially January 2002, 14  pulling this        off the top of my head.
15          MR. COUTU:      It  was around the November time 16  frame.
17          MR. WEIL-:    So, well my point is      it  was after 18  this assessment so I          don't understand the relevance 19  of the assessment period which was before they raised 20  the issue.        We're asking the question,          they raised 21  the issue    and the chilling effect,        if    there was any, 22  would be afterwards,          not beforehand.
COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.-
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)        653-1622
33 1          MR.      CAPRISTO:        I  think as I      speak to the next 2 line      --
3          MR.      WEIL:    Okay,      well go ahead then.            Maybe 4 we'll        have to come back to the question.
5          MR.      CAPRISTO:      Certainly.
6                          On that next line,            again speaking to 7 the    fleet-wide safety cultural                  assessment as an 8 effort        to benchmark our entire fleet,                  we commissioned 9 an independent review by an expert                        in  this    area, 10  Synergy Consulting Services.                        Synergy's survey 11  instrument provides opportunities                        to demographically 12  identify the working group.                      It  does not identify you 13  by name,          but identifies        you as a working group.              In 14  the September 2001                survey,      the demographically 15  important          group is      known as "CL"        or contract labor.
16  And in        that particular work group,                again in      the 17  September 2001 time frame,                    what we identified through 18  the Synergy report was that the working environment, 19  the safety culture and nuclear safety in                            general was 20  rated in          the category of "good"            to "very good."        Now, 21  again,        it's    important to understand a few things.                      We 22  don't      know that      these      --  that    any.of    the principals COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S.      COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)              653-1622
1  in  this  survey specifically responded to this su3 2 but to the extent      that we can demographically      isc 3 a working group to contract          labor, which would bE 4 representative      of this work group,    that is    the rE 5 that we were provided by the consultant.            Now.,
6 potentially      speaking more directly to your point, 7 conducted    a follow-up survey earlier      this year ar 8 the same working grouping identified little            to nc 9 change in    that surveyed area.
10        MS. LONGO:    Excuse me,  I  have a question.      'y 11 identified that the result of your survey was a-c 12 to very good response for contract labor.            What d 13 categories exist?        Excellent,    superior,  awful, 14 average?
15        MR. CAPRISTO:    I don't have those committed 16 memory,    ma'am,  but there are more positive and le 17 positive responses.        I believe we get all    the way 18 down to the range of unacceptable.          I  would confi 19 that though.
20        MS. LONGO:  Okay. But there are more positi 21 responses than "good" to "very good."
22        MR. CAPRISTO:    That is  correct.
COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)    653-1622
35 1      MS. LONGO:  Thank you.
2      MR. COUTU:  Before we leave this line,        I would 3 like to address your question very directly.
4      MR. WEIL:  Sure.
5      MR. COUTU:  If    you think about a chilled work 6 environment  and you think about individuals who can 7 claim to have reported the issues to their 8 supervision over the course of a period all          the way 19 back to the July time frame and those concerns not 10 being addressed,    I believe that survey conducted in 11 September is  very important to understanding what 12 type of work environment existed as a result of 13 individuals  feeling free to report concerns to their 14 supervision and having those concerns acted upon.              Sc 15 there is  a period of time between July and September 16 where these involved individuals experienced a work 17 environment and then in      September had an opportunity 18 to,  through the cultural      survey,    to do that. That 19 provided us our baseline.        So it's  really important 20 to understand we're talking about the issue of what 21 was the work environment before,          and during,  and then 22 also what was it    after    we took our actions?      And that COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)    653-1622
1 kind of ties      everything together because it's 2  important  because chilling goes way beyond just t 3 actions that we took,          it  goes to the fact that 4  supervisors allegedly failed to act on concerns.
5        MR. WEIL:        Your point    is    well taken.      I'm mc 6  interested in,        of course,    in    anything after the f 7  to rule out,      you know,      that there was a chilling 8  effect because of maybe any potential retaliation 9  perceived    retaliation,        whatever it        may be. That' 10  what we are most interested              in.
11        MR. COUTU:        And we understand that.
12        MR. CAPRISTO:        And I think that as I continu 13  think we get more focused and on point to this 14  working group as I          continue.
15        MS. PEDERSON:        If  I could,      before you go on, 16  you have a recollection of what kind of response 17  you got on your labor force?                Was it  a small 18  percentage of people responded to this                  survey suc 19  that it  was not necessarily representative                  of the 20  group as a whole?
21      MR. CAPRISTO:        The consultant provides us wi 22  the response rate both overall and within the wor, COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)              653-1622
1  group.        I  think most directly to your point,                        the 2  consultant          also provide us,          with,    if    you will,      an 3  asterisk        that identifies        when the response rate is 4  less than sufficient              to assign any statistical 5  significance            and this work group did not meet that 6  trigger.          In    reverse,  yes,    it  was a statistically 7  significant            sample based on the population.
8          MS..DIXON-HERRITY:            Was the outage over at this 9  point?        Were the people that you were taiking to 10  during your cultural              survey,      were these the same ones 11  there during the outage and in                    July?
12          MR. CAPRISTO:      The September 2001 survey would 13  have been at the time that the steam generator 14  replacement          outage was staffing and beginning.
15          MS. DIXON-HERRITY:        Okay.
16          MR. CAPRISTO:      And I think I          spoke to this third 17  point,      is    that the follow-up assessment                    that we took 18- in  January 2003,          again with the same demographics, 19  did not      identify      any significant          --    statistically 20  significant change.              Again though,          I must note that 21  this    may or may not have been the same employees.
22  This is,        again,    a migrating work group and it's                    some COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S.      COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)                  653-1622
38 1 period of time later.
2                      More directly      within the Day &
3  Zimmerman working group,          in  isolation of this    fitness 4  for duty issue,      there were many other indicators to 5  us that there were potential barriers,            to problem 6  reporting within the Day & Zimmerman organization.
7  We took action as licensee          with Day & Zimmerman 8  management    to direct them to better        understand their 9  overall working      environment.      And as a result of our 10  direction    to Day & Zimmerman management,        Day &
11  Zimmerman    commissioned an independent consultant,            Dr.
12  Michael Quinn of Management          Systems,  to interview and 13  understand the entire working environment              and outline 14  for us any potential barriers to problem reporting 15  within this    working group.
16                    Dr. Quinn reported to us and to Day &
17  Zimmerman in    a report dated January 31,        2002,  and his 18  fieldwork was conducted primarily in            November and 19  December of 2001,      so, again,    I  think it-speaks 20  directly to the environment          at that time.
21                    It's  important      to understand again 22  though,    going back to the migrating work group idea, COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)      653-1622
1  that the Day & Zimmerman work force at this point was 2  primarily at Point Beach,      so the majority of folks 3  that Dr. Quinn worked with were in      the Point Beach 4  organization at that time.
5                    What we identified was that there were 6  in  fact barriers    to problem reporting within this 7  working group but that they primarily manifested 8  themselves    for what we would call    "craft  labor 9  culture.". And I  think any of us that have managed 10  not only a union work\force      but also a craft labor 11  work force can understand the complexities and the 12  issues that are sometimes unique to managing such a 13  work force.      This is  not a unique issue to Nuclear
: 14. Management Company.      But most importantly,    again 15  through the interview process and through the 16  entirety of Dr. Quinn's work,  he did not identify any 17  barriers  that related    in  any way to the Kewaunee 18  fitness for duty issue.      And those issues that he did 19  identify,  NMC did take action on which we will 20  outline later.
21                    Finally, NRC had previously asked us 22  to look at this issue and in      our response in    a COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)    653-1622
40 1 February 8,      2002  letter  to NRC,  NMC has provided the 2 results    of yet another review of the safety conscious 3 work environment      within Day & Zimmerman.      This time, 4  our methodology was slightly different.          We utilized 5  the services of a member of my staff,          Mike Langley, 6  employee concern program manager,        came to Point Beach 7  and Kewaunee and interviewed members of the Day &
8  Zimmerman staff      and asked them what potential 9  barriers    there might be to problem reporting and whether or not there was a willingness          to problem 11  report.
12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)  653-1622
41 1 see the fact that there were barriers to problem 2 reporting within the organization,                    which goes all            the 3 way back        to  our --  some of our    initial        slides      which 4 said that people chose or appeared to rationalize why 5 they did not have to comply with the fitness                            for duty 6 policy when they are required                to. report        the odor of 7 alcohol        on another individual.          So,    that appeared to 8 us,    and from our studies,          and from our 9 investigations,          to be rooted    in  a  different        --  in  a 10 different          cultural aspect of the labor work force, 11 and as a result,          not as a.result        necessarily of our 12 investigations,          investigation-related,              although some 13 of this is,          but as a result of our investigations 14 into the culture of the work force we took some 15 actions        to bolster that culture.            And I'm going to 16 ask Mr.        Cleveland and Mr. Capristo to address those 17 actions.          Although they were not directly related, 18 all of them were not directly related to this,                            we 19 recognize          that these were important to bring in                    here 20 because we knew that a certain culture                        existed in        the 21 work force and we really can't tolerate that culture 22 continuing if          we're going to-operate the plant COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S.      COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)              653-1622
42 1 safely.
2          MS. PEDERSON:    Can I ask you a question before 3  you get into your actions?
4                          You focused a lot    on Day & Zimmerman.
5  Did you have similar kinds of responses or barriers 6  identified        in  other work groups?
7          MR. CAPRISTO:    I would say to a lesser extent, 8  yes.      But  the --  our primary focus and the primary 9  activity      of those drivers that brought us to the 10  conclusion that we needed to work with Day &
11  Zimmerman was primarily volume to the employee 12  concern program.            So we had a,  if  you will,  a 13  continuing stream of input that indicated to us that 14  work needed to be done and focused within the Day &
15  Zimmerman organization.
16          MS. PEDERSON:      How about other NMC facilities?
17  Again,      a lot    of focus on Point Beach,    Kewaunee,  Day &
18  Zimmerman;        any other input on other NMC facilities.?
19          MR. CAPRISTO:      We have not found    -- we have not 20  found to this          extent any type of issue at any other 21  NMC facility.          Day & Zimmerman,    please correct me if 22  I'm wrong,        does support our other NMC sites.
COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)    653-1622
43 1      MR. ROGOFF:    That's correct.
2      MR. CAPRISTO:      But we have not seen those type 3 of issues surface at other NMC facilities.
4      MS. PEDERSON:      Now,  the survey,    you mentioned 5 the Synergy survey,      that was for all      NMC facilities?
6      MR. CAPRISTO:      That's correct.
7      MS. PEDERSON:    And if  I understand your 8 discussion,  your two other reviews that you did, 9 evaluations,  were specific to Day & Zimmerman at 10  Kewaunee?
1.1      MR. CAPRISTO:    Kewaunee  and Point Beach, 12  correct..
13        MS. PEDERSON:    Kewaunee  and Point Beach,        thank 14  you.
15        MR. COUTU:    I  think another important thing to 16  remember is  that at the time Kewaunee and Point Beach 17  were being managed as a three-unit        site    organization, 18  and so that's    kind of an important thing to remember.
19  Our employee concerns were all        together at that 20  particular point in      time.
21      THE COURT:. Thank you.
22      MR. CAPRISTO:      That's  correct.
COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)      653-1622
44 1          MR. BERSON:      Just kind of a detail.        The Synergy 2  study,      did it    also break down results by facilities 3 as well as across          the fleet?
4          MR. CAPRISTO:        Yes,  it  did. I am not certain if 5 we broke Kewaunee          and Point Beach out in      isolation to 6 each other.          I believe at that point        it was a 7 three-unit        site. But,    yes,  there are different 8 results      at Prairie      Island and Duane Arnold and our 9 other NMC facilities.
10          MR. BERSON:      But the "good" to "very good" 11 reference      from the slide was to overall          fleet 12 results?
13          MR. CAPRISTO:        That was specific to the Kewaunee 14 and Point Beach environment within Day & Zimmerman, 15 within the contract labor pool.
16          MR. BERSON:      Okay. Thanks.
17          MR. COUTU:      So,  Randy,  if  you would take us 18 through Some of the corrective                actions we made and 19 then Aldo will also address.
20          MR. CLEVELAND:        Okay.
21                          As Tom has already stated,      we did take 22 some actions with respect to access authorization                    for COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)          653-1622
45 1  those people which we believe made a conscious, 2  deliberate decision to not follow the Kewaunee FFD 3  program and not report the FFD concerns,              specifically 4  the odor of alcohol on supervision.
5                      We, across the program,          went and 6  underscored the importance of the immediate reporting 7  of the odor of alcohol to supervision and the need to 8  act on it.      We did that through a number of actions 9  which I will detail here.
10                      We have a form that is        part of our 11  access authorization program,        it's    called a "Rights 12  and Responsibilities        Statement" that each individual 13  has to sign and is      acknowledging    they read and 14  understand prior to being granted access on to our 15  sites.      Where devised that to underscore          the 16  importance of reporting the odor of alcohol 17  immediately to supervision and the consequence                for 18  not reporting it      which puts your access authorization 19  at risk.      That applies fleet-wide      to anyone coming 20  into an NMC site      would have to complete that form.
21                      Another fleet-wide    initiative      that we 22  undertook was to put out a program reminder.                This COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)        653-1622
1 was done        through various communication vehicles z 2  the sites,        again underscoring the importance of t 3  immediate reporting of the odor of alcohol,            and 4 consequence        for not doing so,    and also addressed 5 general      FFD concerns.
6        MS. PEDERSON:    If  I  could go back to your fi 7 item as far        as taking action?
8        MR. CLEVELAND:      Sure.
9        MS. PEDERSON:    Am I    correct that three 10  individuals were denied access at Point Beach,              ve 11  four?
12        MR. CLEVELAND:      Four at Kewaunee.
13        MS. PEDERSON:    Okay.
14        MR. CLEVELAND:      For the failure to report th 15  reported detection of odor of alcohol to supervis 16        MS. PEDERSON:    Okay.
17                        And then at Point Beach,    several w 18  denied    --
19        MR.      CLEVELAND:    The same four would be denie 20  throughout        the NMC fleet.
21        MS.      PEDERSON:    Okay.
22        MR.      CLEVELAND:    If  you're denied at one site COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)    653-1622
47 1 you're denied at all.
2      MS. PEDERSON:    Okay,    it  was four.        Thank you.
3      MR. MADEDA:    I  have one question.            The 4  individuals that you were talking about,                are other 5  key players that you interviewed in              this,    has there 6  been any access    authorization issues involving them?
7      MR. CLEVELAND:    No.
8      MR. MADEDA:    So,  you are talking about the four 9  welders.
10      MR. CLEVELAND:    We're talking about the ¶ur 11  welders  andV 12      MR. MADEDA:    Okay.
.13      MR. CLEVELAND:      A total      of five that we took
: 14. access authorization      on:      The    u rJhat      failed to 15  report and 16      MR. MADEDA:  Okay.
17      MS. PEDERSON:    Five.
18      MR. CLEVELAND:    We denied his access.
19      MR. MADEDA:  So,  there's      been no access 20  authorization action taken against eitherL 21 22      MR. CLEVELAND:    Correct.
COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)            653-1622
48 1        MR. MADEDA:      Thank you.
2        MR. CLEVELAND:
* the 3  superintendent      --  well,  let  me just  sort of qualify 4  there with respect to you mentioned 5        MR. MADEDA:      Yes,  sir.
6        MR. CLEVELAND:        Right. With respect to time 7  frame,    we  took no action.
8        MR. MADEDA:      Has there been subsequent action?
9        MR. CLEVELAND:      Correct. As he --    in  a 10  pre-access    test    in  March of this year,      he was denied 11  as a result      of a positive test.
12        MR. MADEDA:      And the positive test      was for?
13        MR. CLEVELAND:      Alcohol.
14        MR. MADEDA:      Thank you.
15        MR.' CLEVELAND:        LIwas                coached and 16  counseled regarding          the zero to erance expectation 17  that NMC has with respect to the odor of alcohol, 18  that even a faint or imperceptible              smell needs to be 19  acted on,    that that as a stand-alone          is  a basis for 20  taking action.        He had initially      indicated to us that 21  he considered the odor faint and imperceptible and 22  did not notice any other signs such as unsteady gait, COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)          653-.1622
49 1 slurred speech,        et cetera.
2                        We went back and again underscored the 3  importance of immediate reporting of the odor of 4  alcohol through a test          questionnaire        and general 5  employee-training        program,  made the same 6  clarifications        underscoring    the importance of and 7  applying of FFD procedure.
8          MR. CAPRISTO:    And then,    finally,      I would add 9  that,      as I  stated,  what Dr. Quinn's report and what 10  we were well aware of'was that we had what I                  would 11  most appropriately        characterize as labor relations 12  issues between the local labor union hall and the 13  employer,      the national employer,        Day & Zimmerman.        We 14  had had a,      at this point,    a fairly      long history of 15  issues within this working group and this population 16  of workers that periodically supports our site,                  so we 17  identified      the action to go speak with the local 18  labor union leaders,        the head steward,        and I'm not 19  exactly sure of the titles,          at the Green Bay Locals, 20  and speak to them directly on what exactly our 21  expectations      are as a nuclear employer and the 22  differences      between working    and earning your income COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)        653-1622
50 1 at the nuclear facilities              in  contrast to the 2 remaining period of time when they worked at other 3  non-nuclear    facilities.            We explained that problem 4  reporting is      not only desired,            but in    fact required 5  as a condition of employment such that people do need 6  to bring forth their              issues and will be held 7  accountable    if    they fail        to bring issues forward.            We 8  expressed to them,          in    the most fundamental        terms,    the 9  differences    between nuclear employment an non-nuclear 10  employment.      This meeting was held with Day &
11  Zimmerman    representatives            and Nuclear Management 12  Company employees to express those thoughts and 13  expectations.
14        MR. CREED:      What was their        response?
15        MR. CAPRISTO:          I,  generally,    I would say 16  understanding,      and I believe we left              them with a 17  better appreciation          for the differences          between 18  nuclear    and non-nuclear          employment.        I  would  -- I'm 19  not sure that I would say that there was any further 20  characterization        than a good understanding.
21        MR. BERSON:        Can you say again when 22  tested positive?
COUNTY COURT REPORTERS,            INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD.,          WHEATON,  IL.  (630)  653-1622
51 1        MR. CLEVELAND:      Pardon?
2        MR. BERSON:      Can you state again when                        1 3 tested positive?
4        MR. CLEVELAND:      On a pre-access      test.
5      MR. BERSON:    When was that?
6      MR. CLEVELAND:      March of this year.
7      MR. BERSON:    March of this      year.
8      MR. CLEVELAND:      2003.
9      MR. MADEDA:    Regarding that pre-access          test, 10  would it    be the licensee's policy to have an 11  out-briefing of that individual to present that 12  individual's side?
13        MR. CLEVELAND:      No,  we  -- on a pre-access        test 14  such as that,      it's    an automatic denial for a minimal 15  period of one year.
16        MR. MADEDA:    Dift *--provide                    any 17  comments to any of your staff,              either at the site          or 18  corporate,    regarding the positive test            results?
19      MR. CLEVELAND:      That I      would have to research, 20  Terry. I  do not have that readily available.
21      MR. MADEDA:    Thank you.
22      MR. COUTU:    So,  in  summary,    our investigations COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)          653-1622
52 1 did not substantiate the allegation that the odor of 2 alcohol had in        fact been reported to the contract 3 mechanical      and civil    superintendent,,
4                      Also,  that NMC did not conclude,      based on the information that we obtained in            our 6 investigations        tha    i            rovided incomplete 7 or inaccurate        information.
8                      We also concluded that a chilling 9 effect      has not been created at NMC facilities          as a 10  result      of this  fitness foi    duty issues and we do not ii  believe that,        although there were violations of our 12  fitness      for duty policy,      clearly they were on the 13  part of                  &the    general mechanical 14  superintendent,        and certain individuals    in. the work 15  force;    we do not believe that those support escalated 16  enforcement.
17          MS. PEDERSON:      Thank you.
18                        At this  time,  I'd like to ask if      there 19  are any of the NRC representatives            that have 20  questions of NMC.          Should we start    with headquarters?
21          MS. LONGO:    Yes,  I have some questions.
22                        My name is    Giovanna Longo,    I'm with COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)      653-1622
1 the Office    of General Counsel.        I have some quest 2  for Mr. Cleveland.
3      MR. COUTU:    He's getting a drink of water.
4        MS. LONGO:    Okay,  well we'll wait for Mr.
5  Cleveland to come back.
6        MR. CLEVELAND:      I'm here.
7        MS. LONGO:    There you are,      okay.
8                    First    of all,    can you hear me?
9        MR. CLEVELAND:      Yes,    I can.
10        MS. LONGO:    Can you hear me okay?        Okay.
11                    Mr. Cleveland,    your presentation 12  consistently focused on whether or not anyone 13  reported,  quote,  "an odor of alcohol,"      unquote.
14      MR. CLEVELAND:      Correct.
15      MS. LONGO:    Okay.
16                    Is    that the only way in    which sorRe 17  can report a fitness for duty concern?            Is  there 18  other way they could report a concern?
19      MR. CLEVELAND:      There are other ways they ca 20  report a concern.
21      MS. LONGO:    Okay.
22                    Suppose one of these welders had s, COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)      653-1622
54 1  to*          *quote,              "I  ain't  going to work for a" 2 blankety-blank,          expletive deleted,        "drunk like him,"
3 unquote;      is  that a report of a fitness          for duty 4 concern?
5        MR. CLEVELAND:        Yes.
6        MS. LONGO:      Okay.
7        MR. COUTU:      Let me expand upon that.        It could 8 be. Depending on whether the individual's 9 observations were based on his performance                  at work or 10  based on his knowledge of the individual's habits 11  outside of work.
12        MS. LONGO:      Okay.
13                          Mr. Cleveland,      we too have information 14  that certain people said they did not report a, 15  quote,      "odor of alcohol,"        unquote. But we also have 16  information that certain people reported that they 17  thought,      to,                    that they thought 18                  was drunk.      And we' have corroboration      from 19  three individuals that                        admitted that he 20  received reports from at least two of these people 21  that they thought                              was drunk.
22        MR. CLEVELAND:      Our investigation      --
COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)        653-1622
55 1          MS. LONGO:    So if  your    --  so what      I am saying 2  is,    if  your investigation focused on whether somebody 3  reported an "odor of alcohol,"              you missed the boat.
4          MR. COUTU:    I think we're going to let            Mr.
5 Walker,      who conducted the investigations,              help to 6 answer some of your questions at this                  time.
7          MS. LONGO:    Before Mr.      Walker responds,        in 8 connection with this same point that                  I'm making I 9 have several other questions,              but this    disconnect 10  between what you found and what we found I                    think has 11  to do with this        focus on,    quote,    "odor of alcohol,"
12  unquote and there's        more to it.
13          MR. CLEVELAND:    We understand the distinction 14  and we too developed the same information as part of 15  our investigation.          The  --  if    you look at      the sum 16  total      of what we developed      in    our investigation,      you 17  can definitely        argue that    the general      opinion --    or 18  there was a general opinion out there that some folks 19  believedtrlili            to be a drunk.        We did not develop 20  that anybody believed                        to be drunk at work.
21  And he focused on the odor of alcohol because that 22  would certainly be,        at work,      something that would be COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL.        (630)  653-1622
56 1  actionable under our program.
2        MS. LONGO:    Okay,  well this    is    an important 3  point,    Mr. Cleveland,    because the evidence that we 4  have developed      that  01 developed      --  first    of all  I 5  want to ask,      was                  interviewed?
6        MR. WALKER:      I interviewed him.
7        MS. LONGO:                        Okay.
8        MR. CLEVELAND:      Yes.
9        MS. LONGO:    Okay.
10                      c7tells                  us that 11  came into a trailer,        the trailer      where 12  and                were seated and said,          quote,    "that two 13  individuals told him,          quote,    'they  ain't  going to 14  work for an,"      expletive deleted,        "drunk like          fit 15  unquote.
16                      We also have evidence from 17  his testimony was that                      7nadmitted in 18  December of that year that                      and      *told    him 19  that they thought                            was drunk.      Not that 20  they smelled alcohol but they thought he was drunk.
21                      We have evidence from 22  I'm sorry,      from mister --    excuse me,      I'm getting COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
        *nn P    rCOTTY FARM RD.. WHEATON. IL.        (630)  653-1622
57 1  these names confused a little            bit      --
2  the foreman :in question.                                  told us also 3  that in    December,                      aid,      yeah;  two people 4  came to him and said that they thought                                    s 5  drunk,    drunk or smelled of alcohol,Q 6  couldn't    remember which,      whatC[said.                          But 7  they thought he was,          at that time,          impaired.
8                      So that I    am concerned that you 9  focused on    "odor of alcohol" when there is                  more to 10  it,  and                telling    you,    "Yeah,                never 11  said to me that these people said 12  smelled of alcohol,"          well that's        true,    but he also said thatsaid 13                                  that these two people 14  thought that                    was drunk at that time.              Are 15' you aware    of that?
16        MR. COUTU:  We are.      I'd    like Mr.        Walker to 17  address that if      you would allow us'some time to 18  discuss the issues?          We were aware of some claims.
19  They later    were contradicted,        we believe.
20                      And,    Mr. Walker,      if    you would?
21        MR. WALKER:  Yes.      Good morning.
22        MS. LONGO:  Good morning.
COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
AnO S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)                653-1622
58 1          MR. WALKER:        My name is          Hal Walker.          I was the 2  person asked to do the investigation                          at the Kewaunee 3  nuclear power station.                As a part of the request for 4    the investigation included was there any FFD issues 5  associated with D&Z,            Day & Zimmerman NPS?                  My 6  questions to these gentlemen,                      and I    did speak to them 7  on December 17,          Monday December 17 I spoke witho 8 Iabout                  several      issues associated with the 9  welding program and any idea of any suggestion about 10  fitness    for    duty.      I didn't      --    1 didn't      couch it  in 11  a,    "Did you smell alcohol?"                "Did you report a smell 12  of alcohol?"          I  couched it        this manner to keep it 13  from anything.          I  asked him        --
14          MS. LONGO:        Mr. Walker,        I'm sorry for 15  interrupting you but on your statement that you 16  interviewed                          and -you asked a question,. was 17  he aware of a fitness for duty concern;                            did you ask 18  him whether he was aware of a fitness for duty 19  concern with'                              in    August of 2001?
20          MR. WALKER:        I'm going to answer your question.
21          MS. LONGO:        Okay.
22          MR. WALKER:        Fitness for duty issues.                    Mr.
COUNTY COURT REPORTERS,              INC.
11^
t'rThrqv  VAPM RD..      WHEATON,    IL.    (630)  653-1622
59 1          was asked if        he was aware of any Day &
2 Zimmerman NPS employees who had been known to work at 3 Kewaunee while unfit for duty.              That should encompass 4 odor,  smell,    impairment,        et cetera. Lj 5 responded by saying,          "Not that I    know of."      That's in 6 quotes.
7                                        was asked if    he had any 8 knowledge    from any source of anyone working inside 9 the KNPP protected area while exhibiting the smell of 10 alcohol. So I went from fitness          for duty issues to 11 smell of alcohol.          He responded in      the negative.
12                    Then I asked was he aware further if 13        -cl      o**hIimself              exhibited the smell of 14 alcohol on his breath inside the protected area?                      He 15 responded that he had no knowledge of 16 smelling of alcohol.            He was open,      appeared complete, 17 and I  went from fitness for duty to the finer element 18 of smell,    and then also tor-                      And I    got 19 negatives    from him on each one.
20      MS. LONGO:        Okay,  Mr. Walker  --
21      MR. WEIL:      If  I  may  --
22      MS. LONGO:      Mr. Walker,    then I    think this    is COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
C  OnM TTv  VAPM RD.. WHEATON, IL. (630)        653-1622
60 1  where the disconnect              is.      Your questions focussed on 2  smell of    alcohol.                                        testimony to 01 was, 3  no,  he was not aware of fitness for duty concerns 4  when the general          question was asked.                        But When he was 5  asked about this          specific incident,                    he says,          "Yeah 6            came in        the trailer              and                and I were 7  there and                    aid,      'These            two people said they 8  ain't  going to work for an,"                        expletive,          "drunk like 91        p  there was no mention of odor of alcohol.                                        So 10  any questions about odor of alcohol would not have 11  triggered his memory,                and what I .am saying is                        I  think 12  that what we got was more complete information.
13          MR. WALKER:        I was unaware of any suggested 14  circumstance        of a trailer.                What I was doing was 15  giving him a general,              overall,              broad question,              and 16  then later      into a more definitive question,                                and then 17  into        t                himself,            which I believe should 18  have elicited          any comments including what you're 19  suggesting regarding the trailer.
20          MS. LONGO:        But as I understand as you just 21  explained      the questions,            all        of them were focused on
'22    smell of alcohol,          and that's              not what he knew about.
COUNTY COURT REPORTERS,                  INC.
                    --  --  1    -  1ýý~    Ir.7TTThTýArln'h%7  TT  I O -3r%  cc.1C)
61 1    What he knew was that two people thought Mr.
2      .*,'eas                drunk.
3            MR. WALKER:      Well,  on these      --
4            MS. LONGO:      And he did not    --    let me finish.
5    Your questions were,            What is  your knowledge?          What is 6    your knowledge?            All he knew is    that somebody, 7 ,came                    in  and said two people thought 8    was drunk.            So I  think that it's      understandable      that 9  your questions would not have elicited                    this 10    particular          incident.
11            MR. COUTU:      I think we have a couple of issues 12    here.        No. 1, I think you're making the leap that an 13    individual referred to as "a drunk" is                  in  fact 14    impaired on the job.              We did not    --  we did not,    we 15    were unable to establish through any of our 16    interviews with specific questions about whether Mr.
17                        as ever impaired on the job,          we were 18    unable to establish that.
19                              Further,  we conducted a follow-up 20    investigation in            preparation for this conference.
21    I've just          asked Mr. Dan Craft to come to the table.
22    Dan,    it's      my understanding    that you did interview --
COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
C,  en-'rmv rpM Dn    WRF.ATON. IL. (630)    653-1622
62 1        MR. CRAFT:      Both                n 2        MR. COUTU:      --    AMr. Mr.        and                    and we 3 believe      that we have additional information                      that 4 substantiates the fact that Mr.                          1        was not 5 impaired while on the job.                  AndI would like to give 6 Mr. Craft an opportunity to talk about that.
7        MS. LONGO:      Okay,    but    this    is  --  this    is  an 8 important      point because I        think that what I'm getting 9 to is,    you know,      we do have independent                corroboration 10  from three people that,            in    fact,            7did 11  acknowledge that he knew that there was a fitness                            for 12  duty concern about                            and in    connection with 13  this I      have to ask you,        you,      during the presentation, 14  I believe you listed,          it  was Mr.        Cleveland who said 15  thasaid                        he did detect a faint odor of 16  alcohol but he didn't think that                                  was 17  impaired so I he. didn't do anything.                      Well,    why. was 18  he smelling                            -
19  breath if      people didn't report that they thought he 20  was drunk?        Is  he generally going around doing that, 21  or how does that happen?              How does that happen?
22          MR. COUTU:      I think it      was through incidental COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
enr  C?  *(-TMV    PARM RD.. WHEATON, IL.          (630)  653-1622
63
/    1 contact with the individual.            He worked with the 2 individual.
3                    But let's    let  Mr. Craft relate      his 4 findings.
5        MS. LONGO:  Thank you.
6        MR. CRAFT:  Hello,    my name again is      Dan Craft.
7 NMC had asked me to take a look at this                investigation 8 from an objective outsider point of view and                  --
9        MR. ROGOFF:    And he is    our employee,      but while 10  he was still    an outsider,      new at the company,          so ii  there's    no confusion there.
12          MR. CRAFT:  I  did take    a  --  I was unfettered          in 13  my access    and my ability      to look at the entire 14  investigation and then take it              wherever I    thought we 15  needed to go with it.        And I    did interview Mr.
16                and                  related to me the same 17  incident that you are referring to where he was in                        an 18  office with                  and                    came in      and 19  said that    "Our hell child,"      meaning                  "and 20          said that they don't want          to work for an,"
21  expletive,    "drunk."    And'              told me that two 22  days.later he went and talked to                    Jabout        that COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
(;0 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)          653-1622
64 1 and asked him about that incident              and              told 2 him that that's        not what he said.      That he said that 3 they needed to get                      some breath mints.          So I 4 asked him exactly,          and he said,  well,    that  --  that 5              meant  that. Qf          as a drunk.        But I 6 asked      --  I told  him that    reasonable  people    can infer 7 that,    but I    wanted to know accurately,          specifically, 8 what he had said?          An            had told                that 9      *needed            breath mints. So it    wasv 10  that was editorializing          to me what he thought 1i1 meant,      and I  asked him not to do that but to be 12  accurate and that's          how he came up with that 13  statement of                  told him that                  needed
: 14. breath mints.
15          MS. LONGO:    Okay. I'm sorry,    could you please 16  tell    me your name again?        I'm bad with names.
17          MR. CRAFT:    Dan Craft.
18          MS. LONGO:    Craft. Mr. Craft. In    your 19  re-investigation,        did you talk to        N 20  again?        What I think is    very significant is        that the 21  person of concern whose fitness for duty was in 22  question told-us that                    dmitted in      December, COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)        653-1622
65 1  "Yeah,      these two guys came and told me they knew Mr.
2                  had a problem.".
3        MR. CRAFT:  No,    I did not.
4        MS. LONGO:  Are you aware of this?                Did you 5 interview                            again?
6        MR. CRAFT:  No,    I did not.
7        MS. LONGO:  Are you aware          --  okay. Well,    we 8 did,    and so you can see where we're coming from.
9        MR. CRAFT:  Yes.
10        MS. LONGO:  Especially whe                                makes 11 an admission like this,              we have to take it        very 12 seriously.        This is  against his interest;            I  think you 13 understand that.
14        MR. CRAFT:  Yes.
15        MR. CAPRISTO:    In    our supplement,        Mr. Walker is 16 just    --    Mr. Walker is    just    reviewing  his    extensive 17 notes,      but we did intervie,                                I believe 18 it  was in      January 2002.        If  we could have a moment to 19 find the reference?
20        MR. DYER:  While we're waiting,          a question I 21 have,      I'm trying to put together            the time line on all 22 this.        There was an initial          investigation-that        you COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
00 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)            653-1622
66 1 performed,    then there was the supplemental 2 investigation that you performed,          and then there was 3 our 01 investigation,      and then there was an 4 independent    review performed by Mr.      Craft. I'm just 5 trying to put together a time line for these,            you 6 know,  when they overlap and where were we in          the 7 process,  if  you would. So,  Mr. Cleveland,  can you 8 address that?
9      MR. CLEVELAND:    Yeah,  I  think I can help clarify 10 that. We had the initial      investigation conducted by 11 Mr. Hal Walker.      And I  think all    those findings were 12 provided to you folks.
13      MR. DYER:    That's the report of February        '02.
14      MR. CLEVELAND:    Correct.
15                    We then,  the next major data point,          if 16 you will,    would be in    June of 2002 where we were 17 provided the document byalleging                        the 18 conversation that took place between                        and 19              *,and the follow-up that we did on that 20 wherein we developed essentially the same thing that 21 your counsel is    briefing regarding the reference to 22 "a drunk."
COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
900 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)      653-1622
67 1      MR. WALKER:    I  think I can respond now.
2        MR. CLEVELAND:      And then    --
3      MR. DYER:  That's June    '02.
4      MR. CLEVELAND:      June of  '02.
5      MR. DYER:  Aniddocument                      concerning 6 what?
7      MR. CLEVELAND:      He provided us a document .that 8 alleged that a conversation had taken place between 9              and "in              which                  admits 10  to -that              people had come to him with the odor of alcohol,    particularly                and    a 12  Cand          that we had interviewed        them immediately 13  following receipt of that and both denied the 14  truthfulness,    accuracy and,    particularly,    that the 15  statement  regarding odor of alcohol was not in          fact 16  made.
17        MR. DYER:  Is  that what you're referring to as 18  the supplemental    investigation earlier?
:19        MR. CLEVELAND:      That was the investigation that 20  we referred to that we did in        June of 2002.
21        MR. DYER:  Okay.
22        MS. LONGO:    Could I interrupt at this        point?
COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL.    (630)  653-1622      'N
                                                  -Nb-610ý 68 1 This is      again  --
2          MR. DYER:      Ginny,  before we get done I just            want 3 to have them complete their              time line.
4          MS. LONGO:      Oh,  okay. We'll come back to it, 5 but,      again,  this    is  another disconnect          and I  think 6 it's      important for you to understand what we have and 7 what you don't have on this point.
8          MR. CLEVELAND:      Okay.
9          MR. COUTU:      I think it    would be best to answer i0  Mr. Dyer's question,        to start  at the beginning when 11  the allegation occurred,              when we started our initial 12  investigation,          when we concluded it,          when we denied 13  access,      when we had the additional              concerns raised, 14  when we began our supplemental              investigation,          when we 15  received the unsigned,            quote-unquote,          affidavit,  et 16  cetera.        And I think it      would be really important for 17  us to go through that because this                    again goes back to 18  the fact that initially            all  of these people,        except 19  for                        told us they never reported.              And 20  after      we took action we had conflicting statements 21  beginning to develop and we went with the experience 22  of our investigators            of when they typically get the COUNTY COURT REPORTERS., INC.
9()n A. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL.            (630) 653-1622
1 most truthful        statements  from individuals      during 2 interviews,      which is    during the initial      intervieý 3 they typically get the most truthful              information, 4 I  think it's      important to understand this time l1 5 understand when additional            information surfaced 6 following actions that were taken.
7      MR. CLEVELAND:        Okay,  so anyway,    Hal,  do yoL 8 have the exact date of the supplemental              investiga 9 so we can get that?
10      MR. WALKER:        The supplemental    investigation.
11      MR. CLEVELAND:        While Hal is  researching      tha 12 will continue on.
13      MR. WALKER:        Two investigative reports were 14 prepared by me.          One was closed January 7,        2002.
it supplemental      report was closed January 30th,          2002 16      MR. DYER:      Okay,  so both of those reports we 17 the basis for,        I think,  your letter    to us of Febr 18 8?
19      MR. CAPRISTO:        That's correct.
20      MR. DYER:        Okay.
21      MR. CLEVELAND:        Then we go to the June time 22 frame.
COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
M ICNTTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)      653-1622
70 1          MR. COUTU:      When did we deny access?
2          MR. CLEVELAND:          We denied access to the four 3 welders at the end of February 2002.
4          MR. MADEDA:        And that was                        and 6          MR. CLEVELAND:
7          MR. COUTU:      When was their        access placed on 8 hold?
9          MR. CLEVELAND:          It was placed on hold,      I  would 10 have to specifically              research that,      Tom, but that was 11 approximately upon the discovery that the people did 12 not report        the odor of alcohol we put it            on hold.
13        MR. COUTU:      Which would have been during the 14 initial      investigation          phase  --
15        MR. CLEVELAND:          Correct.
16        MR. COUTU:      --  prior  to    the  --
17        MR. CLEVELAND:          December time frame of 2001.
18        MR. BERSON:        And just      for completeness,    when 19 were the individuals first                notified or become aware 20 that their        access had been put on hold or denied?
21        MR. CLEVELAND:          The denial would have been by 22 letter      at the end of February.
COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)          653-1622
71 1          MR. BERSON:    Okay.
2          MR. COUTU:    When did they know they were on 3 hold?
4          MR. CLEVELAND:    They were not specifically 5  notified of being on hold.              They didn't      have access 6  at our site        at the time,    and this was not until          we 7  actually denied access that we formally notified them 8  in  writing.
9          MR. BERSON:    Okay.
10          MR. CLEVELAND:    So then you go to the June time 11  frame.        We talked about the receipt of the 12  information from                          the document alleging 13  the conversation that had taken place between Mr.
14                      M      the follow-up we did to that,            and 15  then that takes us to the follow-up work that Dan 16  Craft      --
17          MR. DYER:    And when did Mr.        Craft's 18  investigation        --
19          MR. CLEVELAND:    The middle to the end of June 20  2003.
21          MR. DYER:    That was in  preparation      --  that was 22  as a result        of our letter    to you?
                        .COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)        653-1622
72 1          MR. ARENT:      Yes.
2          MR. DYER:      Thank you.
3                        Ginny,    go ahead.
4          MS. PEDERSON:        Just a moment.        Hal was going to 5  answer an earlier          question.
6          MR. WALKER:      Yes.      This is  Walker again.
7                          Okay,    on January 17th,      January 17, 8 2001,    I  interviewed                          along with Mr.
9 Capristo.        During that        interview,    he stated    --  we 10  were talking about why he would offer himself up for 11  a    for-cause    testing      --
12          MR. ROGOFF:      You said 2001.        You meant to. say 13  2002,    January 2002.
14          MR. WALKER:      I'm sorry, yeah,        2002.
15                          Anyway,                      was asked. why he 16  felt    he had to defend himself .by voluntarily offering 17  to be for-cause tested.                Well,  he said he was willing 18  to be for-cause tested at any time.
19                        And who told 'him he had a smell of 20  alcohol      on his breath,        if  he was offering himself for 21  for-cause testing?            He stated that when                        in 22  August of      2001,    or thereabouts        told him that he --
COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)            653-1622
73 1  that                  smelled of alcohol. And then the 2  question was,      well,  whe              told you that he 3  smelled alcohol on your breath,          did he volunteer to 4  take a for-cause examination?                        'said        he 5 was ready to be for-cause tested whel                      old him 6 that he smelled the alcohol and has no idea why 7  W    jdid    not proceed to have him tested.
8                        Then he went into are you friends with 9                          because there was a connection there 10  that might have been giving him lenience because of 11 12                        We went on from that point to the next 13  phase of questioning was I asked him have other 14  individuals,      other than'              raised this is  concern with you?          Causing you to have breath mints 16  in  the morning along with Scope,          which was part of 17  his commentary.          He said there was one other guy.
18  asked who?        He said,  "I  would rather not say."        I 19  said,  "Was  it    a Day & Zimmerman NPS welder?"        He 20  said,  "No."      I  said,  "Was it  a Kewaunee Nuclear Power 21  Plant personnel?          Was it  a supervisor?"  He said 22  someone told a supervisor that he had alcohol on his COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
4o q    rYTThTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)    653-1622
74 1 breath.        I  said,  "Was the supervisor Day & Zimmerman 2  or Nuclear Management?"            He said it    was Nuclear 3  Management,        but he refused to tell      me and Mr. Aldo  --
4  Mr. Capristo at that time who that individual was.
5  So that's        the questioning that went on.
6                        There was another thing in      here,  he 7  was talking about the subject of a breath mint and 8  things of that nature,          that goes back to some other 9  issues we don't need to get into at this              moment,  but 10  that's    in    response to your question about aski~ng him 11  directly of others,          questioning him on it.
12        MS. LONGO:    Okay.
13                        But,  again,  what we have is  that he 14  made a statement to us,            =              that in 15  December,        not in  August 2001,    but December,        hI 16  came over and they visited and                      told him, 17  "Yeah,    those two guys came and told me you were 18  either drunk or smelled of alcohol."
19        MR. WALKER:                1    ad 20        MS. LONGO:    In August 2001.
21                        Andthis is                      admission 22  against interest.
COUNTY COURT REPORTERS,  INC.
75 1        MR. COUTU:      That may be information that we do 2 not have.
3        MR. WALKER:        He had plenty of opportunity to 4 tell    me the same thing and didn't.                And at the end of 5 it,  Mr. Capristo directly asked                                '    he 6 had ever reported to work in                an unfit condition for 7 any reason.          And his response was a clear "No."
8        MS. LONGO:      Well,    if  he had a drinking problem, 9 that would not be surprising.
10        MR. WALKER:        That wouldn't be surprising,            but 11 the question was asked and answered.                    And also these 12 others.
13        MS. LONGO:      Okay.
14        MR. WALKER:        It was asked and answered.
15        MS. LONGO:      And I want      to  come back to Mr.      --
16 I'm sorry,      it's    just  me,    you know,    I'm just    bad at 17 names.      Mr. Cleveland,    yeah,      okay.
18                        What I wanted to bring up and 19 emphasize    to you earlier          was this    poi'nt about your 20 re-interview of                        fter    you found out about 21 this document,        or supposedly                says  I had this 22 conversation with                      and              said that these COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)            653-1622
76 two people    said,  or some people said that 2 smelled of alcohol.      We also questioned 3 about that document,      and                  told us the same 4 thing. No,          *\did not say that people came and 5 reported thatQ            smelled      of alcohol.          What 6          told me in  December of 2001 was that two 7 people came and saido                          was drunk.
8      MR. CLEVELAND:    The statement        --
9      MR. COUTU:    "Was drunk" or      "was a drunk"?
10      MS. LONGO:  No,  not "was a drunk,"            but was drunk 11 at the time.
12      MR. CLEVELAND:    The information that we had 13 gotten from                is  that-hed 14 admitted to him that these two individuals did not 15 want to work for a drunk.        We did not receive 16 information    indicating that they considered him drunk 17 at work,  no specific behaviors        which were referenced, 18 including the odor of alcohol,          indicating that 19 something had occurred or been observed at work which 20 was actionable.
21                  This was clearly through the sum total 22 of the interviewing that we did,          there was,      if  you COUNTY COURT REPORTERS,      INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD.,  WHEATON,    IL.    (630)  653-1622
77 1 will,      the urban legend throughout              that 2 was a drunk or a heavy drinker.                    But in        terms of 3 specific behaviors at work,              we did several 4 interviews,        including one that was developed                    for us 5 as a source that we could interview which would truly 6 know whether",as                              unfit at work or had 7 the odor of alcohol, this            was a                          his supervisor.,                  ork worked'since                          1985, 8
9 between August of 2001 and November of 2001 he had 10  daily contact with                            3pproxima.tely three 11  to four times a day,            stopped    by 12  office every morning and never had occasion to 13  question his fitness for duty or ever detected the 14  odor of alcohol.
15          MR. ROGOFF:    If  I might,    I have a document that 16  Mr. Craft developed.          He asked in        his interviews          for 17                  to mark up this document            (indicating),          that 18  you probably have all            seen,  that would make it              true.
19  And this      is  the original copy.          It's        written in*
20  Vol          handwriting.      And when he writes,              he says 21              what he does is      he marks up that document that 22  you've      seen and he writes,                      'lnformed            me COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD.', WHEATON, IL. (630)              653-1622
78 1  that he spoke to Harold Walker the allegations that 2 (o                        1 that's        in  the print,    and then in 3  this    blue ink in        the hand of                      "would not 4  work for him because he's a drunk."                      That's what he 5  wrote.        "He's a drunk."          He didn't write --
6          MS. LONGO:      Sir,    that refers to the August 7  incident,        but what I        am talking about is        December.
8  What                tol                n December was that these 9  two had reported that                            was at the time 10  drunk.        At the time drunk.            That's what he told us.
11  And we questioned              --  he discussed it      at some length, 12  so what I'm telling              you is    that I'm not interpreting 13  what we have.          That is      what we have.
14          MR. ROGOFF:        Maybe Mr.      Craft-can come here,      come 15  back to the table and speak to what the time frame is 16  that's      being addressed here.
17          MS. LONGO:      Okay. And it's    possible we are 18  talking about two different times.
19          MR. CRAFT:      It's    my understanding      --  excuse  me, 20  Dan Craft again.
21                        It's      my understanding 22  didn't      work at either of these facilities                in the late COUNTY COURT REPORTERS,          INC.
4nnA. COUNTY FARM RD.,      WHEATON,  IL.  (630)  653-1622
79
-'    1  fall    of 2001,        that he stopped working at some time in 2  October of 2001.
3          MS. LONGO:          -Right. But why is    that important?
4          MR. CLEVELAND:          "1 think you  --  the point you're 5  trying to make is              you're trying to nail down the 6  reference        in    time as to when the statement was made, 7  correct?          It    was  in  the December    --  the late    2001-8  early 2002 time frame?
9          MS. LONGO:          Yes,  because        -made  two 10    statements about what asaid.                            He made a Ii    statement        about what                  said in  August when 12    everybody was employed.at the plant,                    and he made a 13    'statement about. what                        told him privately in 14    December of 2001.                And what I    am talking about,      and 15    the disconnect between what you've got and what I've 16  -got is      about December 2001.            You have got part of 17    what I've        got.      What you have is      that          is 18    telling      you,      "Yeah,              did not say to me in 19    December 2001 that these two welders came and said 20              -. smells of alcohol."'          You have that,      we have 21    that.      But we-also have a statement by 22    the same    time,        he said,    "Yeah,              idn't    say, COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
                        ....,Tnrrv    ZLPM rn.. WHEATON, IL. (630)    653-1622
80 1 anything about smell of alcohol.                What he said,      what 2            told me was these two guys said that 3                was drunk at the time."            Not "a  drunk."
4 "Was drunk."        And I  think you don't have that,            from 5 what I understand.          I'm not criticizing        you. I'm 6 just trying to,      you know,    make sure you understand 7 where we're coming from and that I                understand where 8 you're coming from.
9      MR. COUTU:    It's  a little    difficult      to do that 10 without having both sides of the              --    of what's  been 11 revealed    in  interviews.      We only have what we have, 12 which is    a tremendous number of conflicting 13 statements,      like,  "He was loaded every morning" 14 versus,    "I  don't know anything about him being 15 drunk."    And we're having difficulty.              You may in 16 fact have information that we don't have.                  That's 17 probably part of our frustration.                What we'll try to 18 do is  give you the information that we developed.                      It 19 does not    surprise me that you may have information 20 that conflicts      with ours since we have information 21 that conflicts with our own information from the same 22 sources.
COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)        653-1622
81 1                        So,    again,  I think Mr. Walker is  the 2 best      individual to talk about statements being made 3 by individuals about impairment on the job.
4          MR. ROGOFF:        I think there's    an important point.
5 If    I might,    I  think the one thing we want to do here, 6 since we believe,            Mr. Craft's best recollection is 7 that in      the time frame in          which you are stating the 8 statement      was made,        that              was not working    --
9 not.                                          So the conversation 10 would not have occurred.                That's something that ought 11 to be verifiable          one way or the other by going back 12 to records;        right?        Site records?    Whether they were 13 on-site or not?
14          MR. CLEVELAND:          That definitely would be 15 verifiable.          I think the couple of points that we're 16 discussing here is,              one,  what statement didor.
17              make toin                    December?    We'll use 18 that time frame.            And then,    what was the reference 19 that was made in          the office back in        the July-August 20 time frame of 2001;              correct?
21          MS. LONGO:      Correct.      And I just    want to point 22 out    that  this    conversation      between"        and COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 -S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)          653-1622
82 1    in    December was not on the site.                -said              it 2    was,    you know,    I can't remember,        it    was his apartment 3    ord                apartment,  but it    was not on the site.
4    They were not on the site,            so your site        records are 5  not going tell        you anything about whether they had a 6    conversation.
7            MR. CLEVELAND:      Correct.      And we understand 8    that.      We believe    a --
9            MS. LONGO:    Okay.
10            MR. CLEVELAND:      The conversation took place in 11  V              aiUMapartment.
: 12.          MR. ROGOFF:    Which conversation,          Randy?
13            MR. CLEVELAND:      The-December conversation.
14            MR. COUTU:    There's two.        There's one that 15    allegedly took place in          his apartment and one that 16  allegedly        took place in    that  --  in    the Day &
17    Zimmerman offices.
18            MR. CLEVELAND:    Correct,      back in      the July-August 19    time frame.
20            MS. LONGO:    Okay.
21                          And the other thing I wanted to point 22  out,    I'm not so sure that there is              a conflict    in  what COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)          653-1622
83 1 we have.          It's    simply that we have additional 2 information,            and that's      why we,      in      the synopsis,      we 3 tried    to summarize            it  to you.      Now that synopsis, 4 unfortunately,              did not include the information 5 about    --    which is      really      the most        troubling,      I think, 6 is      Mstatement                                to us,        he admits that 7                said,      "Yeah,      these two guys reported that 8 you,              *were                    drunk."
.. 9          MS. PEDERSON:          What  I  would      --
10            MS. LONGO:      At the time        so  --
I1            MS. PEDERSON:            Since we    --
12            MR. CLEVELAND:            Hal Walker has something to add.
13            MR. WALKER:.      Yeah,    can I      add something here?
14  You're talking abou                                          kay,    and you're is  talking about December.                    Do you have a definitive 16  date in        December?        Or is    it  just      a December date that 17  he had      --
18            MS. LONGO:      I  think it      was-in December.
19            MR. WALKER:        In    December,      okay.
20                              December 11, Tuesday,                December.12, 21  approximately 8:00 p.m.,                  I  had a conversation with 22                          a telephone.          You are correct,            he was not COUNTY COURT REPORTERS,              INC.
          *nA  .. COUNTY FARM RD.,          WHEATON,    IL.      (630)  653-1622
84 1  working at the site.                  He was working at a 2  different          --  he was not working        for  NMC at that    time.
3  And a lot          of this      has to do with other issues,            but 4  when I      got      to this    I asked        91        again,  arnd I 5  don't      know how        --  any way to ask these people,.
6      Ware            you aware of any D&Z NPS employees working 7  inside      the protected area in            violation of fitness for 8  duty policy?"              I'm not trying to limit it            to smell, 9  I'm not trying to limit it                to dope or whatever.            He 10  states to me that he said he was unaware of anyone 11  working at Kewaunee in                violation of the policy.
12                            So I    went further.      I  said, 13              do. you know,"          I asked him if      he knewl*w 14                        And I'll      get to it,  everybody appears to 15  have known                                so he knew 16  And there was some insinuation at one point tha                              .
17 1000        didn't      do something because                            was 18  friends with his.              *" i    or something of that nature.
19  So I      asked him,                    Wjaid he knew                      as 20  an individual who had worked with 21  at both Kewaunee and Point Beach for many years.                            And 22  had worked in            the same service,        inspection service.
COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S.      COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL.          (630)  653-1622
85 1                          I asked him if      he had smelled anything 2  on the breath of                                          was asked 3  if  he had ever had smelled alcohol              to any extent on 4  the breath of                      and          said he has not 5  smelled alcohol          on the breath ofwhile 6  working at Kewaunee.
7                                        further said that 8  would have reported to work,            walk by his office 9  informing him or                        that he was present and 10    go on about his day.            And that was his total        of his il    comments to me,          and this took place December 11th.
12    So,    if    he had these kind of conversations,          this  was 13    very open to him to make his comments to me and he 14    didn't.
15              MS. LONGO:    Mr. Walker,  the conversation between 16  4!!Pj I              'and411."        was in  December. Now I 17    don't know when in            December. Your conversation with 18              Wj-was        December 11th.
19              MR. WALKER:    That's correct.
20              MS. LONGO:    And a reference at another place in 21    somebody else's          --  somebody else    had a  conversation 22    with      --  the two people had conversations        with Mr.
COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S.      COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)    653-1622
86 1              about this    August incident apparently were 2 very close in          time and the other person said he 3  thought'it was around the holidays,              which would be 4 after    December 11th.
5          MR. WALKER:    Or around Thanksgiving.
6          MS. LONGO:    Well,  no,  the testimony was 7 December,        January,    around the holidays.
8          MR. WALKER:    Okay.
9          MS. LONGO:    But the person is    talking about 10  Christmas,        New Year,    so I think what it      sounded to me Ii  like,    after    putting everything together,          it  looks to 12  me like this        conversation,      these two admissions that 13                made to                    -ad to          ere around 14  the Christmas holiday,            which would have been after 15  your discussion of December l1th,              which was why          ---
16  wouldn't have mentioned it.
17            MR. WALKER:      Okay.
18            MS. LONGO:    Okay. And  --
19            MR. WEIL:    Ginny,  excuse me a minute?
.20            MS. LONGO:    Yeah.
21            MR. WEIL:    I may have a point of clarification 22    that might help as far as a date.                Mr. Walker,    it COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL.      (630)  653-1622
87 1 appEears the conversation between 2          occurred some time in        December  after  your 3 intE .rviews with                        if  that helps you at 4 all.
5        MR. WALKER:      What about my interview with 6
7                                      *was interviewed on two 8 occasions.
9        MR. WEIL:    I understand.        I can't place that, 10  but I    can place    it  after    your interview with    --    at 11  least one of your interviews with 12        MR. WALKER:      Okay.
13        MR. WEIL:  That's all      I can do right now.-
14        MS. LONGO:      Okay.
15        MR. ROGOFF:      Could we just      have Mr. Craft  --    you 16  know,    Mr. Craft did go back then and re-interview" 17            and maybe,    Dan,    you could just  review a little 18  bit  of,  you know,    did You. givan 19  opportunity to talk about the smell of alcohol and 20  the state of --      physical state o 21        MR. CRAFT:    Yes. L        old me that nobody ever 22  cameto him and reported that                              smelled COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)        653-1622
88 1 of alcohol      or had been drinking.
2          MS. LONGO:    Are you speaking of 3 couldn't      hear.
4          MR. CRAFT:      Yeah, 5          MS. LONGO:    Okay.
6          MR. ROGOFF:      So,  this conversation would have 7 been well after        the December time frame when,        given 8 the opportunity,        he didn't come forward with that 9 information.          Which is  not to say he didn't say it 10  before,      but it's    just  not what he told us.
ii            MR. DYER:    Let me ask a question first.          I guess 12  the question I have is:            Mr. Craft just said that 13            said nobody had Come to him about          concern about 14                      j  fitness for duty?
15            MR. CRAFT:    Correct.
16            MR. DYER:    I think the question,      and what Ginny 17  was asking was,        had              had conversations with 18                    about somebody coming to 19            MR. CRAFT:    Correct.
20            MR. DYER:    Now,    did you verify  or  --
21            MR. CRAFT:    Yes.
22            MR. DYER:    And he said that discussion did not COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)      653-1622
89 1  occur?
2          MR. CRAFT:      No,    that  --  if  I  understand your 3  question right,          did someone go to              *"ýabout 4
5          MR. DYER:    Basically,        what I understood Miss 6  Longo to say,          and correct me if            I'm wrong,      Ginny,  was 7  that we have evidence that says thati                          S'was 8  told by            --          that somebody had cbme to him 9  about                                fitness for duty.
10            MR. CRAFT:      Correct.
11            MS. LONGO:      Right.        That he was drunk at the 12  time.        There was no mention of smell of alcohol.                        And 13  this gets me back to my point is                      you keep on focusing 14  on "smell of alcohol,"                but that's      not what people 15  were    talking about.
16            MR. CRAFT:      No,    that's    correct,    it  was    --
17            MR. DYER:    The question,          in  fact,  is  not whether 18                    had direct        knowledge,      or somebody had come 19  directly      toi              It    was more was he aware thad i~knew?
20 21            MR. CRAFT:    Right.          But I asked him that anyway, 22  to be thorough,          to see did anybody come to him.
COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)                653-1622
90 1                          But to answer your question,                  yes, this 2    conversation between                        nd              had taken 3  place,      but there's      a slightly      different 4    interpretation or version.                Whated                  told me 5  that              -told    him is    that  --
6          MS. LONGO:    Well,    di                    tell    you that 7 4001said,                    "Nobody ever told me that there was 8  any kind of problem with                k11      " -A4-1f] '    did" 9  say that?
10            MS. PEDERSON:      Ginny,      can we let        Mr. Craft 11    finish his summary,          please?
12            MS. LONGO:      Okay.
13            MS. PEDERSON:      Thank you.
14            MR. CRAFT:      I had asked a specific question,                  did 15    W              ever confront                      ith  this?      The fact 16    that did anybody ever come to him with the smell of 17    alcohol. o 1eing                          unfit    for duty and so 18    forth.      An            told me that he did have a 19    conversation in                        apartment where he 20    specifically asked him about this                    and it    was the 21    version,      the  accurate    --    I had him write it            down in 22    his own handwriting          (indicating),          is that              and COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)              653-1622
91 didn't      want to work for                        ecause he was 2  a drunk.            Not  "drunk,"  but "a drunk."          And I asked 3 him about the affidavit and why he didn't                          sign it?
4  He said because it              wasn't accurate.          So I asked him, 5 well,      what would make it        accurate?        And he told me 6 the series of corrections.                I had him correct it, 7  initial        it  on each of the corrections and then sign 8  it,    and then I        actually signed it        as a witness to him 9  signing it          on June 27th of this        year.
10            MS. LONGO:    Mr. Craft,  in  addition        --
11            MS. PEDERSON:    Did he elaborate          at all    on the 12  context of him being              "a drunk"?        Was there any 13  further exploration of what that meant?                          Whether on 14  site,      off site,      anything further in        that regard?
15            MR. CRAFT:    No. And        jhad        talked to 16                      bout it,    about these    --  this    conversation, 17  had    --    did not witness,        himself,      any fitness for 18  duty,      didn't      see the slurring of the speech or the 19  bloodshot eyes or the gait or anything;                        that he could 20  smell an almost faint,              imperceptible        smell of old 21  alcohol,          like if    he had a lot to drink the night 22  before,        went-to bed early and then just                got up in'the COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S.      COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)            653-1622
92 1 morning and didn't clean up.              That seemed to be his 2 explanation of that.
3                      1 asked-about                  that too and 4  that he had socialized with M                Ohhaand that 5                was a heavy drinker,          that he would drink at 6 night,      then go to bed,    8:30,  9:00 o'clock,        the latest 7  would be 9:30,      and he would drink all          the way up 8  until    he went to bed,      get up in      the morning and come 9  to work and he would have this residual                smell of 10  alcohol.
11          MS. PEDERSON:    But no one caused        --  that    didn't 12  cause him to take a for-cause test,              no when asked 13  that he take a for-cause test?
14          MR. CRAFT:  Correct.      It  wa                    opinion, 15  based upon being a        supervisor      --  and he would also 16  say that,      you know,  he knew the history of 17  for twenty-some years and that he had this 18  reputation,      he had this smell about him.
19  .had                    supervised                    for years and 20  had had him tested 15 times,            always negative.          That 21  he had taken this      medication that made him smell.
22  That he had a problem with his throat,                that it    didn't COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)        653-1622
93 1 close properly,          that any residual odor would still 2 linger.      So        -        was aware of it,  but he also told 3 me that he would watch him and check and he did his 4 job and that's          what he was --    he,.M          was 5 concerned with:            Was he fit  for duty?  And did he do 6 his job?      He didn't        want to get hung up in    the 7 scuttlebutt        or the mudslinging because of this 8 reputation and people,              you know, bad-mouthing 9                    He was more concerned-with        did he do his 10  job and was he fit            for duty?  And his professional 11  opinion at the time,              and we can argue whether it    was 12  right or wrong,          it  was his judgment that he was fit 13  for duty.
14          MS. PEDERSON:          And          elied on the is  behavioral      observation to make that statement?
16          MR. CRAFT:,        Yes.
17          MS. PEDERSON:          Or that observation he was fit 18  for duty,      even though he was aware he was a heavy 19  drinker,    he chose not to have a for-cause test            of*
20 21          MR. CRAFT:          Correct.
22                          PlusLa*would              challenge him, COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
r OTrKThTV  VARM RD.. WHEATON, IL. (630)  653-1622
94 1 say,  "If  you think I'm drunk,          let's  go right now, 2 take me for a test,"          a                idn't. Now,    that 3 may be an error in          judgment,    and I think NMC had 4 counseled him on that and taken corrective action, 5 that that's    not permissible        in  our sites,  but that 6 was his opinion at the time given the circumstances, 7 and he did what he did why he did it.
8      MS. PEDERSON:        Thank you.
9      MR. COUTU:      I  think also to put in      perspective 10 maybe the two individuals that claimed to have this 11 conversation,        one of those individuals was also the 12 individual who said,          quote,  "loaded every morning,"
13 "The ,foremarnlwas      loaded every morning'"        and later    was 14 reported    to say,      "I  don't know anything about him 15 being drunk."          That he was escorted to the collection 16 point by the foreman            and it  turned out he was not 17 escorted to the collect collection point by the 18 foreman.      That the collector recognized the foreman 19 as being    "a  little      ripe";  and neither of the 20 collectors    interviewed corroborated          even the fact 21 that the individual escorted,            that the foreman 22 escorted the individual to the collectors'                site,    nor COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)        653-1622
95 1 making a remark that the foreman was "a little          ripe."
2                    We also-have  the claims,  the erroneous 3 claims that individuals went through an access portal 4  together,    one was pulled out of line for for-cause 5 testing,    which our records do not substantiate;        they 6  only substantiate a random test        at some point after 7  that in    the day.
8                    You know,    we could focus on one 9  statement    made by this individual,      but my sense is, 10  to get a real picture of what we are dealing with 11  here,    you've got focus on the numerous      conflicting 12  statements that this individual gave us.          And we 13  went  --  we went  to NMC employees  who work with this 14  individual to try to determine whether or not there 15  were any cases of unfitness for duty.
16                    Mr. Walker?
17        MR. WALKER:    Yes?
18        MR. COUTU:    How many people would you say you 19  overall interviewed?        And did any of them give you an 20  indication that there was ever a time that            .
21              was on-site unfit for duty?
22        MR. WALKER:    In both these investigations,    with COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)  653-1622
96 1  all  these issues included about 34 individuals                I 2  interviewed.        Out of those 34 individuals,          13  I 3  interviewed.directly          regarding a fitness      for duty 4  issue with                          or whatever    they could find 5  out. Not one individual      indicated to me that they 6  observed any impairment in          this individual.        I went 7  over very clearly,          that was part of the testing that 8  was done in      their    training department      and those 9  exhibits...
10                          Now also another individual,        a*.
11  A      I  will bring up now,        who is  really  the person 12  who was    --  the person who was in        the alleged incident 13  wherein                  was tested and                      _as the 14  alleged reason for this drift          of the smell back on 15  him causing him to be tested.            I had this interview 16  with                on December 9th,      Sunday,    December 9th 17  at approximately        7:00 p.m.,  and what he --      he told      me 18  that it    was not uncommon for                          to smell 19  of alcohol in      the mornings but not appear to be 20  impaired.
21                        And I went after    him again and I        said 22  to the extent,        I asked him why he did not bring COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)      653-1622
97 1                    behavior to the attention of management, 2 or any appropriate party?            He said that if    he had 3 seen                        while on the job stumbling around 4 he would have turned him in          to the appropriate 5 parties;      however,    according t 6                  as running a crew,    and if  he was that bad 7 why didn't        his crew turn him in?
8                        Now,  I have to say that of everybody 9 here,    no one expressed to me that the man exhibited 10 any impairment        other than this smell of alcohol, 11 which seems to be pervasive.            I  talked to Mr.
12 Capristo,      I  said if  we interviewed everybody on the 13 site,    probably how many would say they smelled a 14 faint smell of alcohol onn                              Because it is came almost like this rumor,          I interviewed    other 16 individuals,        al                    nd he was talking, 17 discussing about,          well, the alleged incident wherein 18    Uad                    went through and another individual 19 had been tested.          This seemed to be a pervasive 20 thought of him smelling of alcohol based on that 21 event which,        to me,  looks like a --    people  just knew 22 him as,      I  hate to,    quote-unquote,  "a  drunk."    So this COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)    653-1622
98 1  one individual        stated to me,                      he said 2  non-nuclear      jobs he smelled alcohol on him,          but never 3  on nuclear.        Now where is    the impairment?      I didn't 4  see it.      No one brought it      to my attention.
5          MR. CLEVELAND:      You also have to balance the 6  results      of those interviews with interviews of other 7  individuals,        credible  individuals,    such as 8              hich I detailed,      who,  again,  had very regular 9  contact wit                            daily,  multiple times per 10  day,    very close proximity,        early in  the morning and 11  never detected neither the odor of alcohol,                or had 12  reason to question his fitness.              He is  not unique.
13                          we did a follow-up with him based on 14  Mr. Walker's initial      results,    and he too indicated 15  that    he had    --
16          MR. ROGOFF:      You know,  I  think this is    the first 17  time you're referring to                              Can you 18  identify him?
19          MR. CLEVELAND:      Ws                    another craft 20  worker out there whom              iUww w        ould go to 21  occasionally to get some advice or help with the ISI 22  project.      So he had some somewhat regular contact COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)      653-1622
99 1  with                      and,  again, never detected the 2 odor of alcohol or had any reason to question fitness 3  for duty.
4                        Another individual which we 5  interviewed,        this was part,  again,    of Dan Craft's 6  follow-up,      ahe                      is    the NPSýeneral 7  foremannhat was hired onF/30 of 2001,                  and we 8  interviewed him and he again indicated that he had 9  multiple    contacts withQ                    . never had any 10  reason to question his fitness,          did not detect the 11  odor of alcohol and believed him to be a very 12  reliable    worker.
13                                      Lso elaborated that'it's 14  his belief,      based on what he characterized            as 15  attitude,    the attitude problem of                            nd 16        dthat    if    they had had a concern which they 17  believed was not being addressed adequately,                  they 18  would have gone to other folks in          the chain at the 19  time.
20                        And Ailso              partially 21  corroborated our concern with the June 26 statements 22  that we identify in        the employee file      of COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)          653-1622
100 1          MR. ROGOFF:      And if      I    could just make one more 2 point      about what      we call      --    we can call    this    document 3 an "Affidavit" now,            after      it's    been executed.      That 4  it    was done on June 27th of this year,                    so it    was done 5 three weeks ago.            Yes,      it  speaks to the March 6 conversation,        but there would have been ample 7 opportunity when he marked this up to have said,                            "I 8  had a      separate  conversation              in  December,"    so --
9          MR. DYER:    What document are you talking about?
10  I'm confused.
11          MR. ROGOFF:      I'm talking about the document                that 12  was titled      "Affidavit" that was never executed,                    which 13  I believe Ms.        Longo referred to in              her conversation, 14  and that Mr.      Craft,      when he interviewed 15  who now seems to be kind of providing the smoking gun 16  facts,      you know,    that    seems        --  we were not aware of, 17  that I      think it  is    --    he asked-                    to take the 18  document and in        his hand to mark it              up. This is    the 19  original copy,        you can see the blue,                perhaps you 20  can't read it,        but the blue ink.here                and initialed 21  some changes to this.              And each-time that he refers, 22  he talks about        "a drunk,"          not      "drunk."    Admittedly, COUNTY COURT REPORTERS., INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)              653-1622
101 1  as Miss Longo correctly pointed out,              this      refers to 2  the March conversation,          not to December      --
3        MS. LONGO:      To the August,    August.          August.
4 There was no March conversation.
5        MR. CLEVELAND:      I believe the affidavit refers 6 to a conversation in          March of 2002.
7        MR. WEIL:    If  I may at this    point,      counsel?
8        MR. ROGOFF:      Yes,  sir.
9        MR. WEIL:  Our interview,      of course,        was 10  transcribed under oath and our information from 11    "      bout his conversation in      December with*
12              and he was referring      back to                    nd 13                  and we believe      going back to        --
14  remember,    we're focusing on one issue in              July of 15  2001.      So going back to that,      the conversation          is, 16  "He  had been drinking and was a drunk."                That's the 17  quote.
18        MR. ROGOFF:      But could you read the question and 19  the answer so we have some context there?
20        MR. WEIL:  No,    I don't want to go into that 21  because we're still        predecisional,    sir.
22        MR. ROGOFF:      Okay.
COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)          653-1622
102 1        MR. WEIL:    Just,    please,    take my word for it.
2        MR. COUTU:      Are you saying he had been drinking 3 on the job?        Or he had been drinking the night 4 before?
5        MR. WEIL:    Sir,    all    we know,  sir,    is  that it  was 6 in  the fabrication shop,              this conversation came to 7                  by the three welders.              I'll    set the 8 ground there.        It    was the fab shop,          the limited 9 control area,                            had access to the protected 10 area.
11        MR. ROGOFF:      Could you just      read the quote again 12 for me?
13        MR. WEIL:    "I  remember him saying          'drinking'    and 14  'was  a drunk.'"
15        MR. COUTU:    But  its      hard to understand the 16 context    --
17        MR. WEIL:    I understand.
18        MS. LONGO:    If  you will hold on a second.              I 19 have    --
20        MR. WEIL:    Ginny,      let  me finish one other thing.
21        MS. LONGO:      Right.        And when you're through I'm 22 going to add something.                  There's additional      stuff in COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)            653-1622
103 1 the testimony.      I don't mean to --
2        MR. WEIL:    Well,  I'll      let    you decide how much 3 you want to go to.
4                    But one thing I want              to furnish to Mr.
5 Walker is                  continues that"                        h......
ad 6 stated that he denied to Mr.                Walker that he had had'a 7 conversation with                            and    NO 8        MR. WALKER:      Right.
9        MR. WEIL:    So,    going to your conversation,              Mr.
10  Walker.
11                    So,    Ginny,    it's    yours.
12        MS. LONGO:    If  you will just          hang on a second 13  here?
14        MR. BERSON:      This might be          --
15        MS. LONGO:                    -stated,      when he was asked 16  about the affidavi t and the affidavit                  says that 17      l    aid thatj              nd                had reported that ol on*                      and*
18  they smelled alcoh 19  says,  like I said,
* Riaid            they came to him and 20  said they wouldn't      work for him.            That they thought 21  he'd been drinking and was a drunk problem."                    Not 22  that "he was a dru:nk."          "He had been drinking."
COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL.            (630) 653-1622
104 1        MR. ROGOFF:    Did I hear you to read,          quote,  "he 2 then drinking"?        I may have misheard.
3        MS. LONGO:    He  --    I'm sorry,    "He'd been 4 drinking."
5        MR. BERSON:    "He'd been drinking."
6        MS. LONGO:    "He had been drinking."
7        MR. COUTU:    And did you establish what they 8  meant by that?        He had been drinking on the job?              He
: 9. had been drinking the night before?
10        MS. LONGO:    Well,    I  think since these people 11  were on the job,      since                n was on the job,      and 12                          ere on the job and they reported on wan' 13  the job that they thought                      had been drinking, 14  what does      it matter whether he was drinking on-site, 15  or just    before,  or the night before?          If  they thought 16  he was clearly,      you know,      showed signs of being 17  drunk?
18        MR. COUTU:    I didn't      hear that in    your 19  statement.
20        MS. LONGO:    Well,    why did they think he'd been 21  drinking    unless he was      --  clearly  showed  some signs 22  of having been drinking?            Something was wrong.
COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)        653-1622
1          MR. ROGOFF:        I think it    was because there we 2          MS. LONGO:      Is  that not to you an indicatior 3  that somebody might be impaired?                      Is  that not a 4  report of a fitness              for duty problem?
5          MR. ROGOFF:      I think it      was 6  regular behavior to drink.                    I mean nobody doubts 7  that.        You know,      our belief and our conclusion wa 8  that it        was confined to after hours,                so that when 9  somebody says          "he had been drinking,"              there wasn' 10  any  --    there's    no news in      that    statement just          in 11  of itself.            Unless one can establish,              I    think,  is 12  what Mr.        Coutu is    asking,  that they're            --
13          MS. LONGO:      Well,    if mister      --
14          MR. COUTU:      I guess in      reality,      its      irreleva 15  Its  irrelevant          in  that we did not have that same 16  statement          in  our investigation.          So,    we if      we agr 17  today that you probably have some information or 18  have had some information or different                          statements 19  than what we received,              I think it's        wrong for eit 20  of Us to infer what it              meant.      But it      is    a statem 21  that we obviously don't have in                    our investigation 22          MR. DYER:    Let me back up.          Let me ask a COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S.      COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)                653-1622
106 1  question here,        I  think,    and redirect      this a little 2  bit. You know,      the violation we're looking about 3  doesn't go todrinking                                    problem.      It 4  goes to what did                            know,    or what was he 5  told?    And I    think that what we're telling                you is 6  that we have independent              information that says that 7                    -cknowledges        being told by the two 8  individuals,        regardless      of their  motives,      that,    the 9  way we understood it,              thatL                    was    --  had a 10  fitness    for duty problem.          You know,      whether he is        a 11  drunk,    drinking,      whatever it      was,  if  an employee 12  comes to their        supervisor and makes this,              "I  don't 13  want to work for a drunk,"              and,  you.know,      is  that the 14  type that you want to make an distinction as to 15  whether he's drinking after              work and he's hung over 16  in    the morning?        or, you know,      does that raise enough 17  of a concern to cause a for-cause fitness for duty 18  test?      That's-sort          of where we are,      and what didM 19              know?    So,      I don't want to get into whether 20  or not-mister --          the history      of-21  drinking.      It's      a question of what did 22  know?    And if      you    --  you know,    what was your basis COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)            653-1622
107 1 for making your investigation?
2                          It's    obvious our investigation has 3 different        conclusions than yours did,                      and I  think 4 Ginny.      And we've shared with you that going to 5 independent third              parties who were relating 6 conversations,          other conversations of 7 would indicate that these individuals had come to 8 him,    regardless of the motives,                    and provided some 9 sort of an accusation that he wasn't fit                              for duty, 10  that                    w      wasn't fit          for duty.        So if 1.1 there's    a    questions          -'if      you have        something on that, 12  we don't need to get into the debate,                            did he have a 13  drinking problem or anything else like that.                                It's 14  more directed as to what did                                          know?
15          MR. ROGOFF:          Randy,. could I          ask you if      you had 16  what you believed to be credible evidence that the 17  individuals had gone to'and 18  had st.ated something that you believed that to be 19  credible,      had come to him and said that he had been 20  drinking,      with the inference or the direct statement 21  of on the job,          or was impaired on the job,                    would your 22  decision have been different with respect                              to COUNTY COURT REPORTERS,                INC.
                  ... ....-        f n      n Att.7 1 nT  TT..    (630)  653-1622
108 2          MR. CLEVELAND:          Absolutely.          Yes.
3                              And the    focus was        exactly      --  that's      an 4  excellent point that you made.                          The focus of our 5  investigation,                we were trying to determine whether 6  anyone had come to                                    Vwith specific 7  articulable,,            actionable observations                regarding 8      81fitness.                      You really,          in  a case like 9  this,      you can't entirely pull it                    away from the 10  context of what was known about"O 13  Clearly,                      cknowledged tha'                                  as 12  known as a,            quote-unquote,        "drinker," but based on 13  his personal behavior observation,                          he did not have a 14  basis for initiating                  a test    or taking further action.
15                                Now,  he was counseled by NMC on making 16  a more conservative                  decision with respect to what he 17  considered the imperceptible                      faint    odor,    but in    terms 18  of people coming to him with a specific concern 19  regarding          fitness      --
20            MR. ROGOFF:        Randy,    if  you would speak more 21  directly to Mr.                Dyer's question with respect to the 22  credibility,              the conclusion you drew with respect to COUNTY COURT REPORTERS,          INC.
                      ....    *Yr                PC r n VN  TT.  (f;1AV)  653-1622
109 1 the credibility        of the individuals who stated that 2 they went to                              Because I        think the 3 gravamen of the concern has been perfectly expressed 4  here,    and we've been through this hour upon hour upon 5  hour,    by Mr. Dyer and that is          how we came to the 6  conclusion      that it        was not credible that the 7  individuals had gone to 8        MR. CLEVELAND:          Ultimately,        what we concluded 9  about                was he didn't go to supervision.                    He 10  was on record with this,              he did not go anywhere with 11  the odor of alcohol.              He didn't      indicate      in  the 12  initial    interviews that there was any other concerns 13  that he had gone.
14          MR. WALKER:        If  I may?      January 15th I had two 15  conversations        wit                    based upon conversations 16  from                    . This was a telephone call              with him 17  down south.        He's in      the7N 18  Local.      What he told me was that regarding the smell 19  of alcohol,      it  wasn't just limited to a smell of 20  alcohol,    as Miss Longo suggests,                was an FFD issue.
21  This was directly          related to what they were telling 22  me about the smell of alcohol.                  He said at this time.
COUNTY COURT REPORTERS,              INC.
                              'L7ýM n    TPWT    M.~i\ TT..  (lO')  653-1622
110 1  while working inside the protected area,              two people 2  occasionally smelled of alcohol.            He identified the 3' two individuals who smelled of alcohol            as both*,
4                and                  This is  the first      time 5  anybody suggested thatl 5smelled                        of alcohol 6  at any point in      time. It  was never corroborated        in 7  any of my other interviews.
.8                                    as asked if  he reported the 9  smelled of alcohol to his immediate supervision?                    I 10  don't think we can ignore this          on two occasions.-        He 11  said he did not report his concerns.            So,    I asked him 12  specifically,      "What did do you?    I want to know what 13  you did with it?"        He said he didn't report *his 14  concerns because then,        he said,  "Look at it      from my 15  point of view,"      and then he talked about being*
16                  I think we're all    aware in  this    room what 17  bein3.ng                  tin a union. He says,      "Look at it 18  from my point of view.          I'm working out of a union 19  hall," which 20 21 22                                      J  He said he didn't want COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
NoN ;. CoCNTY FARM RD.. WHEATON. IL.    (630)  653-1622
il 1  to create waves,            so he kept his eyes open and his 2  mouth shut.
3                            Now,  when he talked      --  he talked to me 4  a little      bit      more,  he talked about he wanted to --
5  he iýtalked                      about going to the employee 6  concerns,        or wanting to go to employee concerns.                  So 7  looking at my notes,              I hadn't really went into that 8  in-depth so I            called him back at 7:55 p.m.            Now,  I 9  had to call          one place,    they had to go get him and 10  bring him back so he could talk to me on the phone, 11  so this was a --            there was a --    it  wasn't an 12  immediate,        there was a lot of deliberate            thought 13  there.      I    asked him what he meant about what he said 14  earlier    and he again reiterated to me that he did not 15  tell    anyone of the smell of alcohol.                So he had an 16  opportunity to tell            me about that.        He didn't  on two 17  occasions in          that same day.
18          MR. COUTU:        And later    claimed that he did.          Or 19  was one of the twoparties                that did.      In  much the 20  same way that we got conflicting                  statements from Mr.
21                  So,      we have an issue here which is,          if  you 22  take anyone's statement made by an individual,                      you COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
                  -.iTrvvrrM%7vD  y    WWN TON. IL. (630)      653-1622
112 1    can support a conclusion.            If  you look at all      of the 2    statements made by the individuals and you look at 3  our initial          assertion that four of the five people 4    said they did not report, it,            they did not report, 5    okay?      The/fthjone        gave a series of conflicting 6    statements        and uncorroborated evidence who happened 7    to be the other individual that allegedly went too 8        *We              had to form an opinion on whether or not 9    these people really did report,            and our conclusion 10    was they did not.
11                            We could take any one statement.          We 12    could take the statement,          you know,    the initial 13    statements of individuals and then discount                  the other 14    ones.      We had to take all      of the information,        come to 15    a reasonable conclusion about whether or not we had 16    impairment on the job and in            fact the individuals did 17    report that.          Our conclusion was,    from the 18    information        that we had,  that that didn't happen.
19                            We clearly admit,    we believe      that*
    ,jN-J 20            .__ had a drinking problem.        Did it  manifest 21    itself    as impairment on the job or fitness for duty 22    on the job?          We were unable to find any information, COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630)      653-1622
113 1  exclusive      of these statements,          which were in    conflict 2  with other statements            that there were cases of 3    impairment      on the job by multiple sources,              so we made 4  a reasonable judgment regarding whether or not those 5  reports were in            fact made.
6                            As it    turns out there's      a whole lot 7  more information on this                affidavit. Ce  of.
8  individuals has since                      .  .    ..          We're 9  not going      into    motives    for  that,  but there    --  there 10    is  --  there's      a    great  deal going on here.
11          MS. PEDERSON:          Are there any further questions 12    from the NRC on this?
13            MS. LONGO:        Okay,  no further questions.        And I 14    thank you for, .you know,                going through the details of 15    what you did and what you have.
16            MR. WEIL:        I  do.
17            MS. LONGO:        Okay,  thank you.
18            MS. PEDERSON:          Chuck?
i9            MR. WEIL:        Mr. Walker,    just a few short 20    questions.
21                            In    your interviews as a professional 22    investigator do you normally share your interview COUNTY COURT REPORTERS,        INC.


as stated cc w/atch. B. Berson, Rill P. Louden, Rill J. Creed, Rill T. Madeda, Rill J. Luehman, OE J. Dixon-Herrity, OE J. Longo, OGC R. Paul, OI:RIII M. K. Fahey, 01 G. West, NSIR OE:EA CONTACT: Charles H. Weil (630 810-4372 NOT FOR PUBI C RELEASE WITHOUT THE A %ROVAL OF THE DIRE OR, OFFICE OF ENFORCEM T Information in this record was deleted in accordance wit1tthe Freedom of )'forratoi0 Act, exemRtions
....O ArL BEFORE THE UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION IN RE THE MATTER OF: )Pre-Decisional Enforcement Conference ) CONFIDENTIAL Nuclear Management Company, LLC, )NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION HEARING July 16, 2003 9:00 o'clock A.M.PROCEEDINGS HAD and testimony taken before the UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION, taken at the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Region III, 801 Warrenville Road, Lisle, Illinois, before Jeffrey D.Stupak, .C.S.R. No. 084-004188, a Notary Public qualified and commissioned for the State of Illinois.PRESENT FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION:
MS. CYNTHIA PEDERSON, Director, Division of Reactor Safety;MR. JIM DYER, Regional Administrator; MR. CHARLES WEIL, Enforcement/Investigation Coordination Staff;MR. BRUCE BERSON, Regional Counsel;MR. JAMES CREED, Safeguards Program Manager;MS. JENNIFER DIXON-HERRITY, Enforcement Specialist, Office of Enforcement; MS. MARY KAY FAHEY, Investigator;
*JCcR 1h County Court Reporters, Inc.County View Centr, Suits 200 600 South County Ydrm Road Oak Brook Office Wheton. lUina 60187 Zanie County Office (630) 654-1121 (630) 6331622 -FAX (630) 653-4139 (630) 897.8852 2 1 PRESENT FOR THE NRC: (Continued) 2 MS. GIOVANNA LONGO; Investigator; 3 MR. PATRICK LOUDEN, Branch Chief, Reactor Projects Branch 5.4 MR. TERRY MADEDA, Physical Security 5 Inspector; 6 MR; GARMON WEST, Security Specialist; 7 8 PRESENT FOR NUCLEAR MANAGEMENT COMPANY, LLC: 9 10 MR. THOMAS COUTU, Site Vice President, Kewaunee Nuclear Power Plant;11 MR. JONATHAN ROGOFF, Vice President and 12 Counsel, NMC;13 MR. GORDON ARENT, Manager Regulatory Affairs, Kewaunee Nuclear Power Plant;14 MR. ALDO CAPRISTO, Manager, Employee 15 Concerns, NMC;16 MR. RANDALL CLEVELAND, Manager, Access Authorization and FFD, NMC;17 MR. DAN CRAFT, Investigator, NMC;18 MR. GARY VAN MIDDLESWORTH, vice president, 19 NMC;20 MR. HAL WALKER, Consultant; 21 MR. EDWARD WEINKAM, director of regulatory services.22 COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 3 1 MS. PEDERSON:
Good morning, I'm Cindy Pedersen, 2 I'm the director of the Division of Reactor Safety 3 here in Region III. This meeting is a predecisional 4 enforcement conference with the Nuclear Regulatory 5 Commission and Nuclear Management Company. It does 6 pertain to apparent violations concerning 7 deliberately failing to execute the fitness for duty 8 program and provide complete and accurate information 9 at the Kewaunee facility.
This meeting is closed to 10 public observation, but as-our policy we are 11 transcribing this because it does deal with 12 potentially willful violations; therefore, I would 13 ask that you all use the microphone, that it will be 14 on if the little green light is on, and ask that you 15 speak loudly so the transcriptionist is able to fully 16 hear everything, as well as those participants on our 17 video conference.
In a few minutes I'll talk about 18 today's agenda, but I'd like to start with 19 introductions, first for the NRC and then Nuclear 20 Management Company.21 Jim?22 MR. DYER: I'm Jim Dyer, Regional Administrator, COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 1 Region III.2 MR. BERSON: Bruce Berson, Regional Counsel.3 MR. LOUDEN: I'm Pat Louden, DRP Branch ChiE 4 Region III.5 MR. WEIL: Charles Weil, Enforcement Special 6 Region III.7 MS. DIXON-HERRITY:
Jennifer Dixon-Herrity, 8 with the Office of Enforcement, Headquarters.
9 MR. MADEDA: Terry Madeda, Region III Kewaun 10 Security Inspector.
11 MR. CREED: Jim creed, Region III, Safeguard 12 Program Manager.13 MS. PEDERSON:
NRC observers, please?14 MR. NEURAUTER:
I'm Jim Neurauter, Region II 15 MR. PERGANDE:
Shaun Pergande, engineering 16 group.17 MS. BOND: Jamie Bond, nuclear safety inspec 18 MS. MELENDEZ:
Danada Melendez.19 MR. PAUL: Rich Paul, 01.20 MS. FUNK: Dawn Funk, physical security 21 inspector.
22 MS. PEDERSON:
And headquarters, please?COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 5 1 MS. LONGO: Giovanna Longo, Office of General 2 Counsel.3 MS. FAHEY: Mary Kay Fahey, Office of 4 Investigations.
5 MR. SUPUNSIS:
NSIR.6 MR. WEST: 'Garmon West, NSIR.7 MS. LONGO: This is Ginny Longo. We don't see 8 you on the camera through your end. Is that 9 purposeful, or are you not aware of that?10 MS. PEDERSON:
We are taking care of that.11 Thank you, Ginny.12 MS. LONGO: Thanks.13 MR. LOUDEN: How's that?14 MS. LONGO: Thank you very much.15 MS. PEDERSON:
For NMC, please?16 MR. ROGOFF: I'm Jonathan Rogoff, NMC in-house 17 counsel.18 MR. COUTU: Tom Coutu, Kewaunee Nuclear Plant, 19 site vice president.
20 MR. CLEVELAND:
Randy Cleveland, NMC access 21 manager.22 MR. CAPRISTO:
Aldo Capristo, fleet employee COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 USNRC REGION III ORMA 5302101U10 OB/2S/2005 12 :22 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 concern program manager.MR. WALKER: Hal Walker, I'm an investigative consultant.
MR. PICKENS: Terry Pickens, director of government affairs, NMC, Hudson.-~ -MR. ARENT: Gordon Arent, regulatory affairs manager,*
Kewaunee.MR. WEINKAM: Edward Weinkam, director of regulatory services.MR. VAN MIDDLESWORTH:
Gary VanMiddlesworth, vice president, assessments, for NMC.MR. CRAFT: Dan Craft, with Nuclear Management Company. -*MS. PEDERSON:
Thank you.The purpose of today's meeting is to gather additional information for us to make our enforcement decision.
As the title implies,"predecisional enforcement conference" means we have not yet made that decision.
It's very important today that we fully understand your perspective of the facts of the case and any additional thoughts you may have about enforcement.
~i I I COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Briefly I will go over the agenda.After I have concluded my opening remarks, Chuck Weil will briefly discuss the enforcement policy. We are operating under a traditional enforcement policy in this regard.COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 8 I Somewhat unique in this particular 2 case is in our-June 9th letter we also specifically 3 asked that you address any potential chilling effect 4 at other NMC facilities since some of the individuals 5 in Kewaunee that were involved in the fitness for 6 duty issue were denied access at Point Beach.7 Finally, I encourage you and your 8 staff to present anything else that you feel is 9 relevant to our decision.10 I am sure you've probably had an 11 opportunity to review the enforcement policy again;1.2 as such, anything that may factor into decisions on 13 civil penalties, if any, we would also like to hear 14 your perspective.
15 Following your presentation and any 16 questions that we may have, we will take a short 17 break. When we reconvene we may have a few 18 follow-along questions.
Following that, Chuck Weil 19 will summarize where we go next as far as the formal 20 process is concerned.
And lastly, Jim Dyer will 21 provide closing remarks.22 I will note that we will be making no COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 1 final decisions during this meeting, so we will r 2 be presenting anything of that nature.3 Before we continue, I'd like to ju 4 comment on what the significance of what we're he 5 to discuss today. As you know, the NRC considers 6 potential deliberate violations very seriously.
7 addition to the potential of this case of having 8 unfit individual on site, the potential here is t 9 a supervisor deliberately failed to take action a 10 then later potentially lied about his knowledge.
11 And, obviously, that is not acceptable.
Our 12 regulatory framework relies on individuals to con 13 with our requirements in a trustworthy manner. I 14 somebody violates that trust it does shake the 15 foundation of our regulatory framework and cannot 16 tolerated.
17 With that, John or Tom, any openin 18 remarks you would like to make?19 MR. COUTU: I do have some opening remarks 20 before we begin the presentation, but let me begi 21 with the fact that we at Kewaunee and NMC take 22 fitness for duty, access authorization, employee COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 1 concerns and safety conscious work environment v(2 seriously.
3 This has been a long and difficult 4 investigation.
We still, coming into this 5 conference, are not clear on the exact nature of 6 violations, so we will present to you a purpose, 7 we believe is the purpose for our meeting today 8 then our objectives.
As I have said this has beE 9 difficult issue for us to pin down. There are --10 there's very little in the way of hard facts. Mc 11 of the information that we have has been the resv 12 of interviews with numerous people. Conflicting 13 statements have been made. We have had very much 14 a lot of difficulty corroborating statements that 15 individuals have made. So, were we forced to dra 16 conclusions based on what we believed to be the w 17 reasonable sequence of events that occurred and %18 intend to show that to you today, how we came to 19 conclusions we did based on the information that 20 had..21 We hope that this can be a very op 22 exchange of information.
Our goal here is really COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 1 get to the right conclusion and not to defend onE 2 position or another. So if the NRC is in possesE 3 of information that we do not have, we hope to ol 4 that information today. And if our course of act 5 need to be changed, we will in fact change our cc 6 of actions.7. So with that, I'd like to just, if 8 nobody has any questions, move into the presentat 9 MS. PEDERSON:
Okay.10 MR. COUTU: Oh, also, this can get complicat 11 from a names and positions perspective, so if you 12 would, we've prepared just a little chart of who'13 who as far as folks that were involved initially 14 the concerns and folks that we talked to and feel 15 that we will be speaking about today in our 16 presentation.
17 MS. PEDERSON:
What I would suggest is that 18 NRC participants return this document to you sinc 19 would be personal privacy information and I would 20 that we return it to you at the end of the meetin 21 MR. COUTU: All right. It's going to be tou 22 to keep track of everything for anybody who hasn'COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 12 1 been very familiar with this.2 MS. PEDERSON:
I appreciate that.3 MR. COUTU: Okay.4 Gordon?5 MR. ROGOFF: Before Tom begins, it's going to be 6 very difficult to talk about this without speaking 7 the names of some of these individuals so, I mean, I 8 think we --9 MS. PEDERSON:
Right. My only point of that is 10 it being a document submitted to the agency, you 11 know, as part of this. But you're right, we will 12 that's why it's closed. We will be talking personal 13 privacy and potential willful.14 MR. COUTU: Okay.15 So, first off I will cover the purpose 16 of -- what we believe to be the purpose of this 17 enforcement conference, our objectives.
And I will 18 also cover at a very high level the results of our 19 investigation.
I would ask that, unless there's a 20 real burning question at that point, to kind of wait 21 on questions until Mr. Randy Cleveland makes his 22 presentation on the details of the investigation.
COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 13 1 MS. LONGO: This is Ginny Longo. I have to 2 interrupt you, I'm sorry, just to ask. You all were 3 going to fax something, it hasn't come. Is there a 4 problem? I understand part of your presentation is 5 writing and we were going to be faxed a copy; is that 6 correct?7 MR. MADEDA: The fax should be on its way.8 MS. LONGO: Okay.9 MR. MADEDA: Yeah, there should be a second fax 10 also coming.11 MS. LONGO: Thank you. Sorry.12 MR. COUTU: So, Mr. Cleveland will present the 13 investigation details and then Mr. Aldo Capristo will 14 present the potential effect or lack of potential 15 effect on safety conscious work environment.
During 16 the course of the investigation, we did discover some 17 things that we did act upon. We will be covering 18 those actions, and Mr. Cleveland and Mr. Capristo 19 will in fact lay those out for you. And then I will 20 come back and wrap things up.21 Our purpose today, we believe it is to 22 provide the NRC with facts that NMC investigations COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 14 1 revealed regarding allegation one, which was that 2 welders deliberately followed the -- failed to report 3 fitness for duty concerns; and a contract mechanical 4 and civil superintendent, that would be'4;5 failed to report a fitness for duty concern involving 6 a foreman, and that would be a Day & Zimmerman 7 foreman, contract foreman, that would 8 or your chart; to provide the NRC with 9 facts that NMC's investigations revealed regarding 10 allegation three, which is that a rontract mechanical 13 and civil superintendent again provided 12 false information to the NMC investigator relative to 13 being informed about the fitness for duty concern 14 involving
:he foreman, LL11JAWAiV>fi95>
also,.)%J to 15 provide, the NRC insight from the NMC's evaluation of 16 potential for chilling effects as a result of the 17 actions taken during our investigations and to 18 provide our conclusion concerning potential 19 violations.
20 Our objectives today are to show that 21 the NMC investigation was thorough and that our 22 conclusions were based on the facts, and probably COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 15 1 more correctly based on reasonable judgment 2 surrounding the information that we gained through 3 the interview process and several other fact-finding 4 initiatives that we identified; to demonstrate how we 5 carried out our fitness for duty obligations based on 6 the information
*that he has obtained during the two 7 related investigations; and to explain how NMC 8 maintained a safety conscious work environment 9 throughout the course of the investigation and 10 afterwards and how we managed that.11 At a high level, the results of the 12 investigation, and then I'll go over what the 13 original allegation was that was brought to our 14 attention that launched into the investigation, and 15 that was that a Day & Zimmerman NPS supervisor turned 16 their heads when certain individuals come in half 17 blitzed. That was the original allegation.
18 Due to the potential seriousness of 19 the issue, wetretained the counsel of an independent 20 investigator, actually the services of an independent 21 investigator, iWalker Consultants, and that's Mr. Hal 22 Walker at theiend of the table (indicating), he was COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.-600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 16 1 retained to complete a comprehensive investigation of 2 this incident.3 Our investigative efforts and 4 conclusions were summarized and reported to the NRC 5 in a letter dated February 8 of 2002. There were 6 basically two investigations.
We had an initial 7 investigation and then a supplemental investigation, 8 and we'll go through the results of those.9 The initial investigation identified 10 four individuals who stated that on occasion they 11 perceived the odor of alcohol on the breath of a Day 12 & Zimmerman foreman, that would be'13 while inside the Kewaunee protected area. None of 14 the individuals notified their immediate supervisor 15 or other member of management at the time that they 16 detected the odor of alcohol. That is the finding of 17 our investigation.
18 All four individuals who detected the 19 odor of alcohol on the breath of the Day & Zimmerman 7 20 forema' -1ere aware of their responsibilities to 21 report or act.22 And as a result, during of course of COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 1 our investigation we uncovered some trustworthinE 2 and reliability issues that led us to deny access 3 because the individuals did not report the odor c 4 alcohol when they detected it. They basically fE 5 to support our fitness for duty policy and reallj 6 gave us no indication that they would support thE 7 fitness for duty policy.8 A supplementary investigation was 9 undertaken following communication by a concerned 10 individual to our, to NMC employee concerns progi 11 That individual wished to provide us additional 12 information or observations relative to the initi 13 investigation, so we opened a supplemental 14 investigation to follow up on those. This concer 15 individual provided two new elements of concern.16 was related to the fitness for duty issue. The o 17 element was related to welding issues and that ha 18 two parts. We investigated, we thoroughly 19 investigated the two elements and neither of the 20 elements are substantiated.
21 What we did find on the initial 22 allegation, as a result of both investigations, i COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 18 1 that the concern was partially substantiated.
it 2 could not be concluded that the Day & Zimmerman 3 foreman was ever on the job unfit for duty. We were 4 unable to conclude that. It was concluded that the 5 odor of alcohol was detected.
And, in fact, it was 6 concluded that the Day & Zimmerman superintendenA 7 failed to comply with our fitness for duty program by 8 not ordering a for-cause test upon the detection of 9 an odor of alcohol. And although he performed 10 additional behavioral observations to ascertain 11 fitness for duty, he did not act in accordance with 12 our fitness for duty policy which does require 13 for-cause testing. It was also not substantiated 14 that any welder reported, initially reported the odor 15 of alcohol to the immediate supervisor or any member 16 of management.
17 So, again, we do not'substantiate the 18 allegation that the odor of alcohol had been reported 19 to the contract mechanical and civil superintendent, 20 We did not conclude that the' contract 21 mechanical and-civil superintendent provided 22 incomplete or inaccurate information.
We do not COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 19 1 believe that a chilling effect had been created at an 2 NMC facility as a result of this FFD issue or actions 3 that NMC has taken in response to what we discovered 4 in the course of our investigations.
And we do not 5 believe at this time that any findings support 6 escalated enforcement.
7 And with that, I'd like to turn it 8 over to Mr. Randy Cleveland to provide additional 9 detail on what we discovered through the course of 10 our investigations.
11 MR. CLEVELAND:
Okay, I'm going to highlight the 12 NMC investigative findings supporting our conclusion 13 that the superintendent, -wasnot 14 informed of anlcohol on ofO 15 Our investigation focused on five 16 welders, each reporting that they detected the odor 17 of alcohol on, and whether they reported 18 the odor of alcohol to the superintendent, 19. Our investigation concluded that four of 20 the welders deliberately failed to report the odor of 21 alcohol. This conclusion is based on two primary 22 findings:
One, that the welders were adequately COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 20 1 trained on the expectation to report FFD concerns;2 and the second, they provided specific reasons for 3 not reporting the odor of alcohol to supervision.
4 And, particularly, that these reasons were provided 5 prior to their notice by us of denial of access.6 The welders, I'll begin with 7 again provided specific reasons. He asked the 8 investigator, Hal Walker, to look at things from his 9 point of view, that as a 10 11 12 you didn't want to, as he stated, "Create 13 waves. You kept your eyes open and your mouth shut." 14 That was the reason that gave for not going 15 forward with the odor of alcohol to supervision.
16 simply stated it was not his 17 job to sniff others.18 J Istated that supervision was 19 aware of drinking habits; therefore, 20 there was no reason to report. And he was a fellow 21 worker.22 Finally,.
simply stated he COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 21 1 feared union reprisal as the basis for not reporting 2 the odor of alcohol to 3. The tifth welder having reported the 4 detection of alcohol ultimately 5 found to be not credible.
This was based on our 6 finding of contradictory statements, uncorroborated 7 claims and a threat that the individual made to 8 which we will detail a little further in the 9 presentation.
10 Regarding the first area of concern, 11 with this is the fifth welder's 12 credibility
--13 MR. COUTU: Let me make sure you understand.
14 We're going to focus on the fifth welder because he 15 was the only individual who told us that he reported.16 *The other individuals clearly told us they did not 17 report. So we are going to spend some time on this 18 individual because we wanted to be sure that we 19 understood whether or not he in fact did or did not 20 report. And that's really important.
21 MR. CLEVELAND:
The first area of concern with 22 j redibility involved contradictory COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 22 1 statements he made to NMC investigators.
The first 2 example includes a statement that he made on January 3 11, 2002, stating that ýhe foreman, !-4 was loaded every morning, and in a subsequent 5 interview with NMC security on March 27 he made the.6 statement that he didn't know anything about the 7 foreman being drunk.8 The second example involves a random 9 testing situation wherein, again on/ nuary 11, 202 10 claims that he was escorted to the 11 collections site at Kewaunee for a random test bye.12 On March 27 of 2002, in a subsequent 13 interview again with NMC security, he this time 14 denies being escorted to the collection site by the 15 foreman, j 16 Our third example of a contradictory 17 statement concerns, again, a random collection 18 wherein alleges that the collector 19 performing the random drug and alcohol test 20 acknowledged the escort,,S and again 21 these statements were made on January 11, 2002 as "a 22 little ripe." This was in response toj3 COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 23 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14"..15 16'17 18 19 20 21 22 challenging the collector as to why she was not testing the messenger, the escort, ......In an interview with NMC security on June 12 of 2002, again reiterates that j-as not at the collection site and this time that when he challenged the collector regarding why she wasn't testing the messenger, she appeared puzzled and did not in fact make such a statement, appeared "a little ripe." The second area of concern with respect to credibility involved uncorroborated claims. We've got.three examples here which I would like to detail.The first one involved claim that che foremani and a co-worker,=
went through access control together and that one hour later the co-worker, ]was for-cause tested. Our review of test records from- we were only able to identify a random test in y 2001 time frame. There was no record at all of a for-cause test conducted o The second uncorroborated claim ties COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 24 1 back to the previous contradictory point we covered 2 wherein -6 ."claims the collector acknowledged 3 thelforeman s not fit for duty. This 4 is getting back to the "a little ripe" statement.
5 Again ]claimed he was escorted by Mr.6 Lto the collection site, that he challenged 7 the collector as to why she wasn't testing the 8 messenger, and the messenger acknowledged, yeah, he's 9 "a little ripe." 10 We interviewed both of the collectors 11 that performed random tests on in y of 12 2001and neither of the collectors could recal26 102 13 escorting.
to the collection 14 site, making any such statements regarding 15 why they weren't testing the messenger, and neither 16 had any reason to ever question 17 fitness for duty.18 The third example involves a document 19 that. provided to us on June 12, of twice-20 removed hearsay, essentially a he-said-that-he-said-21 that-he-said.
The document alleging that the 22 superintendent, admitted to receiving COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 25 1 reports of the odor of alcohol and lying to 2 investigators.
3 Our follow up on this, we immediately 4 re-interviewed Background on 5 what the document detailed, it detailed a 6 conversation betwee and in which 7 t40 011`t hat aand Qlhad reported to him the smell of alcohol on 9 and that ;lied to NMC 10 investigators regarding the same. Our interview of ii ind found both denied the 12 truthfulness of the document and neither acknowledged 13 that the statement regarding anyone reporting the 14 odor of alcohol to- -was made.15 The third area of concern regarding 16 involves a statement he 17 made to the superintendent in June of 18 2001. This was developed by Mr. Dan Craft of my 19 staff. Dan Craft was recently hired by us, he's got 20 31 years of experience with the Federal Bureau of 21 Investigation, he was a special agent and supervisor 22 in character of investigations.
We commissioned Dan COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 26 1 to take a look at, in preparation for the enforcement 2 conference here, the entire investigation that was 3 done, all that was conducted by Hal Walker and any 4 subsequent investigations that we conducted to 5 determine whether it was comprehensive and complete 6 and whether we needed to do additional investigation.
7 One of the things that Dan found, he identified the 8 need to go back and take a look at the employee file 9 01f We did that and that's where we 10 developed the statements made to the superintendent.
12 Dan also did some re-interviewing and some additional 12 interviews and we are -- that information is 13 available.
14 What Dan found in the employee file of is evidence of a statement that he made 16 in June of 2001. had gone toQi 17 concerned that he should have been setup as the 18 foreman on the job. He opinioned that the foreman, 19 is an idiot; asserted, this i 20 asserted that he is not going to burn rod 21 for the rest of his li-fe; and finally, he threatened 22 to "get even and when I do, you people won't know COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11" 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 27 what hit you." This was documented to ...file on June 26th of 2001.MR. BERSON: Could you explain how that information got inton, Ile?reported it?MR. CLEVELAND:
It was iicM" U employee file. It was a signed note of a memorandum of meeting that took place by -- betweenad signed by MR. BERSON: Okay.MR. COUTU: I think it's important here to note that, No. 1, we were not directed by anyone to go look at this file. It wasn't like_ said,"go check his file." This was an independent piece.I think the second piece, that's important to understand is the time frame in which this was entered, which was before, really, any of these allegations were claimed to have been made, which was in June 2001 time frame, as opposed to starting in July. This whole issue started in the July 2001 time frame. So I think those are important things to understand about time frame and the fact COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622
'J 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9*10 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 28 that no one directed us to go look for this. It just turned up in our investigation.
We would have probably treated it differently ifihad said,"Well, go look in his file. There's something there." It's a great question and, you know, we considered that.MR. BERSON: When di ign this statement?
MR. CLEVELAND:
June 26, 2001.MR. BERSON: He signed it prior to, okay.MR. CLEVELAND:
Correct.So, in summary, with respect to the fifth welder, we ultimately concluded him to be not credible based on the reasons which I just articulated and were ultimately unable to substantiate his claim that he had reported the odor of alcohol t In conclusion, NMC was unable to substantiate that the welders had reported the odor of alcohol to Again, this was based on our finding that the four welders, again prior to their denial of access, stated that they did not COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 29 1 provide that information to supervision, specifically 2 the odor of alcohol on R For the one 3 that did claim that he had reported the odor of 4 alcohol to we spent a great deal of time 5 here detailing our investigative efforts to 6 corroborate his claim and were unable, ultimately 7 unable to do so based on our finding it was not 8 credible, and our inability to substantiate his 9 claims.10 MR. COUTU: I'd like to ask Mr. Aldo Capristo to 11 talk a little bit about the issue that you asked us 12 to address which was potential impacts on a chilled 13 work environment as a result of the actions taken 14 during this investigation.
15 MR. CAPRISTO:
Good morning. As .I mentioned in 16 my introduction, I am currently the fleet employee 17 concern program manager, and I think relevant to this 18 is at the time these events unfolded I was also 19 serving in the capacity as employee concern program 20 manager for the Kewaunee facility, so I was 21 integrally involved in these issues as they unfolded.22 I have two central points. First, COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 30 1 that NMC self-identified the potential for a chilling 2 effect within the Day & Zimmerman organization and we 3 took action to address the safety conscious work 4 environment throughout this period.5 Second, I will explain our basis for 6 our conclusion that the Kewaunee fitness for duty 7 issue did not create a chilling effect at Kewaunee or 8 other facilities.
9 MR. COUTU: That is a typo, should be "did not." 10 MR. CAPRISTO: "Did not create" on the handout.11 I think that's substantial.
Make sure to put that in 12 your notes.13 We based these conclusions on three 14 specific evaluations that are relevant to the time 15 period. First, a fleet life safety cultural 16 assessment that was conducted in September 2001 which 17 is directly in the period of time of interest.18 Second, a more specific concerns environmental 19 assessment that was conducted within the Day &20 Zimmerman working group within the Point Beach and 21 Kewaunee organization.
22 And I think at this point it's COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 1 relevant to mention, again, it's important to 2 understand that this is a migrating working grour 3 that these are not regular employees that support 4 and only one facility.
That as the work at KewaL 5 rolled up with the generator replacement project 6 *the fall of 2001, some of these employees then mc 7 over to Point Beach. I believe that's the basis 8 your concern that this may have had an impact bey 9 just Kewaunee.
So these employees do migrate bet 10 facilities.
11 And third and final is an evaluati 12 that we provided in response to a previous NRC 13 request on this topic.14 MR. WEIL: Could you explain to us how a 15 September 2001 assessment has to do with people t 16 are denied access in, seemingly, December some th 17 months later? I don't understand its relevance.
18 It's beforehand.
19 MR. CAPRISTO:
I think there's a -- as we 20 understand the issue, the issue was brought to ou 21 attention in November that there was a potential 22 fitness for duty issue, that there was an COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 32 1 unwillingness to report, whether it was an unfit 2 person at the facility.
My understanding was that 3 this could have existed in this prior time and I 4 believe we go back to the July 2001 time frame where 5 there were concerns ultimately unearthed there could 6 have been unfit employees, that 7 specifically may have been unfit as early as July 8 2001.9 MR. WEIL: Let me be a little more explicit.
I 10 think the potential chilling effect question we are II asking is, ,after these gentlemen.raised the issue of 12 the fitness for duty issue and I believe circa 13 December, maybe, 2001, to potentially January 2002, 14 pulling this off the top of my head.15 MR. COUTU: It was around the November time 16 frame.17 MR. WEIL-: So, well my point is it was after 18 this assessment so I don't understand the relevance 19 of the assessment period which was before they raised 20 the issue. We're asking the question, they raised 21 the issue and the chilling effect, if there was any, 22 would be afterwards, not beforehand.
COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.-600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 33 1 MR. CAPRISTO:
I think as I speak to the next 2 line --3 MR. WEIL: Okay, well go ahead then. Maybe 4 we'll have to come back to the question.5 MR. CAPRISTO:
Certainly.
6 On that next line, again speaking to 7 the fleet-wide safety cultural assessment as an 8 effort to benchmark our entire fleet, we commissioned 9 an independent review by an expert in this area, 10 Synergy Consulting Services.
Synergy's survey 11 instrument provides opportunities to demographically 12 identify the working group. It does not identify you 13 by name, but identifies you as a working group. In 14 the September 2001 survey, the demographically 15 important group is known as "CL" or contract labor.16 And in that particular work group, again in the 17 September 2001 time frame, what we identified through 18 the Synergy report was that the working environment, 19 the safety culture and nuclear safety in general was 20 rated in the category of "good" to "very good." Now, 21 again, it's important to understand a few things. We 22 don't know that these -- that any.of the principals COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 1 in this survey specifically responded to this su3 2 but to the extent that we can demographically isc 3 a working group to contract labor, which would bE 4 representative of this work group, that is the rE 5 that we were provided by the consultant.
Now., 6 potentially speaking more directly to your point, 7 conducted a follow-up survey earlier this year ar 8 the same working grouping identified little to nc 9 change in that surveyed area.10 MS. LONGO: Excuse me, I have a question.
'y 11 identified that the result of your survey was a-c 12 to very good response for contract labor. What d 13 categories exist? Excellent, superior, awful, 14 average?15 MR. CAPRISTO:
I don't have those committed 16 memory, ma'am, but there are more positive and le 17 positive responses.
I believe we get all the way 18 down to the range of unacceptable.
I would confi 19 that though.20 MS. LONGO: Okay. But there are more positi 21 responses than "good" to "very good." 22 MR. CAPRISTO:
That is correct.COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 35 1 MS. LONGO: Thank you.2 MR. COUTU: Before we leave this line, I would 3 like to address your question very directly.4 MR. WEIL: Sure.5 MR. COUTU: If you think about a chilled work 6 environment and you think about individuals who can 7 claim to have reported the issues to their 8 supervision over the course of a period all the way 1 9 back to the July time frame and those concerns not 10 being addressed, I believe that survey conducted in 11 September is very important to understanding what 12 type of work environment existed as a result of 13 individuals feeling free to report concerns to their 14 supervision and having those concerns acted upon. Sc 15 there is a period of time between July and September 16 where these involved individuals experienced a work 17 environment and then in September had an opportunity 18 to, through the cultural survey, to do that. That 19 provided us our baseline.
So it's really important 20 to understand we're talking about the issue of what 21 was the work environment before, and during, and then 22 also what was it after we took our actions? And that COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 1 kind of ties everything together because it's 2 important because chilling goes way beyond just t 3 actions that we took, it goes to the fact that 4 supervisors allegedly failed to act on concerns.5 MR. WEIL: Your point is well taken. I'm mc 6 interested in, of course, in anything after the f 7 to rule out, you know, that there was a chilling 8 effect because of maybe any potential retaliation 9 perceived retaliation, whatever it may be. That'10 what we are most interested in.11 MR. COUTU: And we understand that.12 MR. CAPRISTO:
And I think that as I continu 13 think we get more focused and on point to this 14 working group as I continue.15 MS. PEDERSON:
If I could, before you go on, 16 you have a recollection of what kind of response 17 you got on your labor force? Was it a small 18 percentage of people responded to this survey suc 19 that it was not necessarily representative of the 20 group as a whole?21 MR. CAPRISTO:
The consultant provides us wi 22 the response rate both overall and within the wor, COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 1 group. I think most directly to your point, the 2 consultant also provide us, with, if you will, an 3 asterisk that identifies when the response rate is 4 less than sufficient to assign any statistical 5 significance and this work group did not meet that 6 trigger. In reverse, yes, it was a statistically 7 significant sample based on the population.
8 MS..DIXON-HERRITY:
Was the outage over at this 9 point? Were the people that you were taiking to 10 during your cultural survey, were these the same ones 11 there during the outage and in July?12 MR. CAPRISTO:
The September 2001 survey would 13 have been at the time that the steam generator 14 replacement outage was staffing and beginning.
15 MS. DIXON-HERRITY:
Okay.16 MR. CAPRISTO:
And I think I spoke to this third 17 point, is that the follow-up assessment that we took 18- in January 2003, again with the same demographics, 19 did not identify any significant
-- statistically 20 significant change. Again though, I must note that 21 this may or may not have been the same employees.
22 This is, again, a migrating work group and it's some COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 38 1 period of time later.2 More directly within the Day &3 Zimmerman working group, in isolation of this fitness 4 for duty issue, there were many other indicators to 5 us that there were potential barriers, to problem 6 reporting within the Day & Zimmerman organization.
7 We took action as licensee with Day & Zimmerman 8 management to direct them to better understand their 9 overall working environment.
And as a result of our 10 direction to Day & Zimmerman management, Day &11 Zimmerman commissioned an independent consultant, Dr.12 Michael Quinn of Management Systems, to interview and 13 understand the entire working environment and outline 14 for us any potential barriers to problem reporting 15 within this working group.16 Dr. Quinn reported to us and to Day &17 Zimmerman in a report dated January 31, 2002, and his 18 fieldwork was conducted primarily in November and 19 December of 2001, so, again, I think it-speaks 20 directly to the environment at that time.21 It's important to understand again 22 though, going back to the migrating work group idea, COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 1 that the Day & Zimmerman work force at this point was 2 primarily at Point Beach, so the majority of folks 3 that Dr. Quinn worked with were in the Point Beach 4 organization at that time.5 What we identified was that there were 6 in fact barriers to problem reporting within this 7 working group but that they primarily manifested 8 themselves for what we would call "craft labor 9 culture.".
And I think any of us that have managed 10 not only a union work\force but also a craft labor 11 work force can understand the complexities and the 12 issues that are sometimes unique to managing such a 13 work force. This is not a unique issue to Nuclear 14. Management Company. But most importantly, again 15 through the interview process and through the 16 entirety of Dr. Quinn's work, he did not identify any 17 barriers that related in any way to the Kewaunee 18 fitness for duty issue. And those issues that he did 19 identify, NMC did take action on which we will 20 outline later.21 Finally, NRC had previously asked us 22 to look at this issue and in our response in a COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 40 February 8, 2002 letter to NRC, NMC has provided the results of yet another review of the safety conscious work environment within Day & Zimmerman.
This time, our methodology was slightly different.
We utilized the services of a member of my staff, Mike Langley, employee concern program manager, came to Point Beach and Kewaunee and interviewed members of the Day &Zimmerman staff and asked them what potential barriers there might be to problem reporting and whether or not there was a willingness to problem report.COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 41 1 see the fact that there were barriers to problem 2 reporting within the organization, which goes all the 3 way back to our -- some of our initial slides which 4 said that people chose or appeared to rationalize why 5 they did not have to comply with the fitness for duty 6 policy when they are required to. report the odor of 7 alcohol on another individual.
So, that appeared to 8 us, and from our studies, and from our 9 investigations, to be rooted in a different
-- in a 10 different cultural aspect of the labor work force, 11 and as a result, not as a.result necessarily of our 12 investigations, investigation-related, although some 13 of this is, but as a result of our investigations 14 into the culture of the work force we took some 15 actions to bolster that culture. And I'm going to 16 ask Mr. Cleveland and Mr. Capristo to address those 17 actions. Although they were not directly related, 18 all of them were not directly related to this, we 19 recognize that these were important to bring in here 20 because we knew that a certain culture existed in the 21 work force and we really can't tolerate that culture 22 continuing if we're going to-operate the plant COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 42 1 safely.2 MS. PEDERSON:
Can I ask you a question before 3 you get into your actions?4 You focused a lot on Day & Zimmerman.
5 Did you have similar kinds of responses or barriers 6 identified in other work groups?7 MR. CAPRISTO:
I would say to a lesser extent, 8 yes. But the -- our primary focus and the primary 9 activity of those drivers that brought us to the 10 conclusion that we needed to work with Day &11 Zimmerman was primarily volume to the employee 12 concern program. So we had a, if you will, a 13 continuing stream of input that indicated to us that 14 work needed to be done and focused within the Day &15 Zimmerman organization.
16 MS. PEDERSON:
How about other NMC facilities?
17 Again, a lot of focus on Point Beach, Kewaunee, Day &18 Zimmerman; any other input on other NMC facilities.?
19 MR. CAPRISTO:
We have not found -- we have not 20 found to this extent any type of issue at any other 21 NMC facility.
Day & Zimmerman, please correct me if 22 I'm wrong, does support our other NMC sites.COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 43 1 MR. ROGOFF: That's correct.2 MR. CAPRISTO:
But we have not seen those type 3 of issues surface at other NMC facilities.
4 MS. PEDERSON:
Now, the survey, you mentioned 5 the Synergy survey, that was for all NMC facilities?
6 MR. CAPRISTO:
That's correct.7 MS. PEDERSON:
And if I understand your 8 discussion, your two other reviews that you did, 9 evaluations, were specific to Day & Zimmerman at 10 Kewaunee?1.1 MR. CAPRISTO:
Kewaunee and Point Beach, 12 correct..13 MS. PEDERSON:
Kewaunee and Point Beach, thank 14 you.15 MR. COUTU: I think another important thing to 16 remember is that at the time Kewaunee and Point Beach 17 were being managed as a three-unit site organization, 18 and so that's kind of an important thing to remember.19 Our employee concerns were all together at that 20 particular point in time.21 THE COURT:. Thank you.22 MR. CAPRISTO:
That's correct.COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 44 1 MR. BERSON: Just kind of a detail. The Synergy 2 study, did it also break down results by facilities 3 as well as across the fleet?4 MR. CAPRISTO:
Yes, it did. I am not certain if 5 we broke Kewaunee and Point Beach out in isolation to 6 each other. I believe at that point it was a 7 three-unit site. But, yes, there are different 8 results at Prairie Island and Duane Arnold and our 9 other NMC facilities.
10 MR. BERSON: But the "good" to "very good" 11 reference from the slide was to overall fleet 12 results?13 MR. CAPRISTO:
That was specific to the Kewaunee 14 and Point Beach environment within Day & Zimmerman, 15 within the contract labor pool.16 MR. BERSON: Okay. Thanks.17 MR. COUTU: So, Randy, if you would take us 18 through Some of the corrective actions we made and 19 then Aldo will also address.20 MR. CLEVELAND:
Okay.21 As Tom has already stated, we did take 22 some actions with respect to access authorization for COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 45 1 those people which we believe made a conscious, 2 deliberate decision to not follow the Kewaunee FFD 3 program and not report the FFD concerns, specifically 4 the odor of alcohol on supervision.
5 We, across the program, went and 6 underscored the importance of the immediate reporting 7 of the odor of alcohol to supervision and the need to 8 act on it. We did that through a number of actions 9 which I will detail here.10 We have a form that is part of our 11 access authorization program, it's called a "Rights 12 and Responsibilities Statement" that each individual 13 has to sign and is acknowledging they read and 14 understand prior to being granted access on to our 15 sites. Where devised that to underscore the 16 importance of reporting the odor of alcohol 17 immediately to supervision and the consequence for 18 not reporting it which puts your access authorization 19 at risk. That applies fleet-wide to anyone coming 20 into an NMC site would have to complete that form.21 Another fleet-wide initiative that we 22 undertook was to put out a program reminder.
This COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 1 was done through various communication vehicles z 2 the sites, again underscoring the importance of t 3 immediate reporting of the odor of alcohol, and 4 consequence for not doing so, and also addressed 5 general FFD concerns.6 MS. PEDERSON:
If I could go back to your fi 7 item as far as taking action?8 MR. CLEVELAND:
Sure.9 MS. PEDERSON:
Am I correct that three 10 individuals were denied access at Point Beach, ve 11 four?12 MR. CLEVELAND:
Four at Kewaunee.13 MS. PEDERSON:
Okay.14 MR. CLEVELAND:
For the failure to report th 15 reported detection of odor of alcohol to supervis 16 MS. PEDERSON:
Okay.17 And then at Point Beach, several w 18 denied --19 MR. CLEVELAND:
The same four would be denie 20 throughout the NMC fleet.21 MS. PEDERSON:
Okay.22 MR. CLEVELAND:
If you're denied at one site COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 47 1 you're denied at all.2 MS. PEDERSON:
Okay, it was four. Thank you.3 MR. MADEDA: I have one question.
The 4 individuals that you were talking about, are other 5 key players that you interviewed in this, has there 6 been any access authorization issues involving them?7 MR. CLEVELAND:
No.8 MR. MADEDA: So, you are talking about the four 9 welders.10 MR. CLEVELAND:
We're talking about the ¶ur 11 welders andV 12 MR. MADEDA: Okay..13 MR. CLEVELAND:
A total of five that we took 14. access authorization on: The u rJhat failed to 15 report and 16 MR. MADEDA: Okay.17 MS. PEDERSON:
Five.18 MR. CLEVELAND:
We denied his access.19 MR. MADEDA: So, there's been no access 20 authorization action taken against eitherL 21 22 MR. CLEVELAND:
Correct.COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 48 1 MR. MADEDA: Thank you.2 MR. CLEVELAND: the 3 superintendent
-- well, let me just sort of qualify 4 there with respect to you mentioned 5 MR. MADEDA: Yes, sir.6 MR. CLEVELAND:
Right. With respect to time 7 frame, we took no action.8 MR. MADEDA: Has there been subsequent action?9 MR. CLEVELAND:
Correct. As he -- in a 10 pre-access test in March of this year, he was denied 11 as a result of a positive test.12 MR. MADEDA: And the positive test was for?13 MR. CLEVELAND:
Alcohol.14 MR. MADEDA: Thank you.15 MR.' CLEVELAND:
LIwas coached and 16 counseled regarding the zero to erance expectation 17 that NMC has with respect to the odor of alcohol, 18 that even a faint or imperceptible smell needs to be 19 acted on, that that as a stand-alone is a basis for 20 taking action. He had initially indicated to us that 21 he considered the odor faint and imperceptible and 22 did not notice any other signs such as unsteady gait, COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-.1622 49 1 slurred speech, et cetera.2 We went back and again underscored the 3 importance of immediate reporting of the odor of 4 alcohol through a test questionnaire and general 5 employee-training program, made the same 6 clarifications underscoring the importance of and 7 applying of FFD procedure.
8 MR. CAPRISTO:
And then, finally, I would add 9 that, as I stated, what Dr. Quinn's report and what 10 we were well aware of'was that we had what I would 11 most appropriately characterize as labor relations 12 issues between the local labor union hall and the 13 employer, the national employer, Day & Zimmerman.
We 14 had had a, at this point, a fairly long history of 15 issues within this working group and this population 16 of workers that periodically supports our site, so we 17 identified the action to go speak with the local 18 labor union leaders, the head steward, and I'm not 19 exactly sure of the titles, at the Green Bay Locals, 20 and speak to them directly on what exactly our 21 expectations are as a nuclear employer and the 22 differences between working and earning your income COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 50 1 at the nuclear facilities in contrast to the 2 remaining period of time when they worked at other 3 non-nuclear facilities.
We explained that problem 4 reporting is not only desired, but in fact required 5 as a condition of employment such that people do need 6 to bring forth their issues and will be held 7 accountable if they fail to bring issues forward. We 8 expressed to them, in the most fundamental terms, the 9 differences between nuclear employment an non-nuclear 10 employment.
This meeting was held with Day &11 Zimmerman representatives and Nuclear Management 12 Company employees to express those thoughts and 13 expectations.
14 MR. CREED: What was their response?15 MR. CAPRISTO:
I, generally, I would say 16 understanding, and I believe we left them with a 17 better appreciation for the differences between 18 nuclear and non-nuclear employment.
I would -- I'm 19 not sure that I would say that there was any further 20 characterization than a good understanding.
21 MR. BERSON: Can you say again when 22 tested positive?COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 51 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 MR. CLEVELAND:
Pardon?MR. BERSON: Can you state again when tested positive?MR. CLEVELAND:
On a pre-access test.MR. BERSON: When was that?MR. CLEVELAND:
March of this year.MR. BERSON: March of this year.MR. CLEVELAND:
2003.MR. MADEDA: Regarding that pre-access test, would it be the licensee's policy to have an out-briefing of that individual to present that individual's side?MR. CLEVELAND:
No, we -- on a pre-access test such as that, it's an automatic denial for a minimal period of one year.MR. MADEDA: Dift any comments to any of your staff, either at the site or corporate, regarding the positive test results?MR. CLEVELAND:
That I would have to research, Terry. I do not have that readily available.
MR. MADEDA: Thank you.MR. COUTU: So, in summary, our investigations 1 COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 52 1 2 3 4 6 7 8 9 10 ii 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 did not substantiate the allegation that the odor of alcohol had in fact been reported to the contract mechanical and civil superintendent,, Also, that NMC did not conclude, based on the information that we obtained in our investigations tha i rovided incomplete or inaccurate information.
We also concluded that a chilling effect has not been created at NMC facilities as a result of this fitness foi duty issues and we do not believe that, although there were violations of our fitness for duty policy, clearly they were on the part of &the general mechanical superintendent, and certain individuals in. the work force; we do not believe that those support escalated enforcement.
MS. PEDERSON:
Thank you.At this time, I'd like to ask if there are any of the NRC representatives that have questions of NMC. Should we start with headquarters?
MS. LONGO: Yes, I have some questions.
My name is Giovanna Longo, I'm with COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 1 the Office of General Counsel. I have some quest 2 for Mr. Cleveland.
3 MR. COUTU: He's getting a drink of water.4 MS. LONGO: Okay, well we'll wait for Mr.5 Cleveland to come back.6 MR. CLEVELAND:
I'm here.7 MS. LONGO: There you are, okay.8 First of all, can you hear me?9 MR. CLEVELAND:
Yes, I can.10 MS. LONGO: Can you hear me okay? Okay.11 Mr. Cleveland, your presentation 12 consistently focused on whether or not anyone 13 reported, quote, "an odor of alcohol," unquote.14 MR. CLEVELAND:
Correct.15 MS. LONGO: Okay.16 Is that the only way in which sorRe 17 can report a fitness for duty concern? Is there 18 other way they could report a concern?19 MR. CLEVELAND:
There are other ways they ca 20 report a concern.21 MS. LONGO: Okay.22 Suppose one of these welders had s, COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 54"I ain't going to work for a" blankety-blank, expletive deleted, "drunk like him," unquote; is that a report of a fitness for duty concern?MR. CLEVELAND:
Yes.MS. LONGO: Okay.MR. COUTU: Let me expand upon that. It could be. Depending on whether the individual's observations were based on his performance at work or based on his knowledge of the individual's habits outside of work.MS. LONGO: Okay.Mr. Cleveland, we too have information that certain people said they did not report a, quote, "odor of alcohol," unquote. But we also have information that certain people reported that they thought, to, that they thought was drunk. And we' have corroboration from three individuals that admitted that he received reports from at least two of these people that they thought was drunk.MR. CLEVELAND:
Our investigation
--COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 55 1 MS. LONGO: So if your -- so what I am saying 2 is, if your investigation focused on whether somebody 3 reported an "odor of alcohol," you missed the boat.4 MR. COUTU: I think we're going to let Mr.5 Walker, who conducted the investigations, help to 6 answer some of your questions at this time.7 MS. LONGO: Before Mr. Walker responds, in 8 connection with this same point that I'm making I 9 have several other questions, but this disconnect 10 between what you found and what we found I think has 11 to do with this focus on, quote, "odor of alcohol," 12 unquote and there's more to it.13 MR. CLEVELAND:
We understand the distinction 14 and we too developed the same information as part of 15 our investigation.
The -- if you look at the sum 16 total of what we developed in our investigation, you 17 can definitely argue that the general opinion -- or 18 there was a general opinion out there that some folks 19 believedtrlili to be a drunk. We did not develop 20 that anybody believed to be drunk at work.21 And he focused on the odor of alcohol because that 22 would certainly be, at work, something that would be COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 56 1 actionable under our program.2 MS. LONGO: Okay, well this is an important 3 point, Mr. Cleveland, because the evidence that we 4 have developed that 01 developed
-- first of all I 5 want to ask, was interviewed?
6 MR. WALKER: I interviewed him.7 MS. LONGO: Okay.8 MR. CLEVELAND:
Yes.9 MS. LONGO: Okay.10 c7tells us that 11 came into a trailer, the trailer where 12 and were seated and said, quote, "that two 13 individuals told him, quote, 'they ain't going to 14 work for an," expletive deleted, "drunk like fit 15 unquote.16 We also have evidence from 17 his testimony was that 7nadmitted in 18 December of that year that and him 19 that they thought was drunk. Not that 20 they smelled alcohol but they thought he was drunk.21 We have evidence from 22 I'm sorry, from mister -- excuse me, I'm getting COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.P rCOTTY FARM RD.. WHEATON. IL. (630) 653-1622 57 1 these names confused a little bit --2 the foreman :in question.
told us also 3 that in December, aid, yeah; two people 4 came to him and said that they thought s 5 drunk, drunk or smelled of alcohol,Q 6 couldn't remember which, whatC[said.
But 7 they thought he was, at that time, impaired.8 So that I am concerned that you 9 focused on "odor of alcohol" when there is more to 10 it, and telling you, "Yeah, never 11 said to me that these people said 12 smelled of alcohol," well that's true, but he also 13 said thatsaid that these two people 14 thought that was drunk at that time. Are 15' you aware of that?16 MR. COUTU: We are. I'd like Mr. Walker to 17 address that if you would allow us'some time to 18 discuss the issues? We were aware of some claims.19 They later were contradicted, we believe.20 And, Mr. Walker, if you would?21 MR. WALKER: Yes. Good morning.22 MS. LONGO: Good morning.COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.AnO S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 58 1 MR. WALKER: My name is Hal Walker. I was the 2 person asked to do the investigation at the Kewaunee 3 nuclear power station. As a part of the request for 4 the investigation included was there any FFD issues 5 associated with D&Z, Day & Zimmerman NPS? My 6 questions to these gentlemen, and I did speak to them 7 on December 17, Monday December 17 I spoke witho 8 Iabout several issues associated with the 9 welding program and any idea of any suggestion about 10 fitness for duty. I didn't -- 1 didn't couch it in 11 a, "Did you smell alcohol?" "Did you report a smell 12 of alcohol?" I couched it this manner to keep it 13 from anything.
I asked him --14 MS. LONGO: Mr. Walker, I'm sorry for 15 interrupting you but on your statement that you 16 interviewed and -you asked a question,.
was 17 he aware of a fitness for duty concern; did you ask 18 him whether he was aware of a fitness for duty 19 concern with' in August of 2001?20 MR. WALKER: I'm going to answer your question.21 MS. LONGO: Okay.22 MR. WALKER: Fitness for duty issues. Mr.COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.11^ t'rThrqv VAPM RD.. WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 59 1 was asked if he was aware of any Day &2 Zimmerman NPS employees who had been known to work at 3 Kewaunee while unfit for duty. That should encompass 4 odor, smell, impairment, et cetera. Lj 5 responded by saying, "Not that I know of." That's in 6 quotes.7 was asked if he had any 8 knowledge from any source of anyone working inside 9 the KNPP protected area while exhibiting the smell of 10 alcohol. So I went from fitness for duty issues to 11 smell of alcohol. He responded in the negative.12 Then I asked was he aware further if 13 -cl exhibited the smell of 14 alcohol on his breath inside the protected area? He 15 responded that he had no knowledge of 16 smelling of alcohol. He was open, appeared complete, 17 and I went from fitness for duty to the finer element 18 of smell, and then also tor- And I got 19 negatives from him on each one.20 MS. LONGO: Okay, Mr. Walker --21 MR. WEIL: If I may --22 MS. LONGO: Mr. Walker, then I think this is COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.C OnM T Tv VAPM RD.. WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 60 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 91 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21'22 where the disconnect is. Your questions focussed on smell of alcohol. testimony to 01 was, no, he was not aware of fitness for duty concerns when the general question was asked. But When he was asked about this specific incident, he says, "Yeah came in the trailer and and I were there and aid, 'These two people said they ain't going to work for an," expletive, "drunk like p there was no mention of odor of alcohol. So any questions about odor of alcohol would not have triggered his memory, and what I .am saying is I think that what we got was more complete information.
MR. WALKER: I was unaware of any suggested circumstance of a trailer. What I was doing was giving him a general, overall, broad question, and then later into a more definitive question, and then into t himself, which I believe should have elicited any comments including what you're suggesting regarding the trailer.MS. LONGO: But as I understand as you just explained the questions, all of them were focused on smell of alcohol, and that's not what he knew about.COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.-- --1 -1ýý~ Ir.7TTThTýArln'h%7 TT I O -3r% cc.1C) 61 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 What he knew was that two people thought Mr.drunk.MR. WALKER: Well, on these --MS. LONGO: And he did not -- let me finish.Your questions were, What is your knowledge?
What is your knowledge?
All he knew is that somebody, ,came in and said two people thought was drunk. So I think that it's understandable that your questions would not have elicited this particular incident.MR. COUTU: I think we have a couple of issues here. No. 1, I think you're making the leap that an individual referred to as "a drunk" is in fact impaired on the job. We did not -- we did not, we were unable to establish through any of our interviews with specific questions about whether Mr.as ever impaired on the job, we were unable to establish that.Further, we conducted a follow-up investigation in preparation for this conference.
I've just asked Mr. Dan Craft to come to the table.Dan, it's my understanding that you did interview
--COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.C, en-'rmv rpM Dn WRF.ATON.
IL. (630) 653-1622 62 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 MR. CRAFT: Both n MR. COUTU: --AMr. and Mr. and we believe that we have additional information that substantiates the fact that Mr. 1 was not impaired while on the job. AndI would like to give Mr. Craft an opportunity to talk about that.MS. LONGO: Okay, but this is -- this is an important point because I think that what I'm getting to is, you know, we do have independent corroboration from three people that, in fact, 7did acknowledge that he knew that there was a fitness for duty concern about and in connection with this I have to ask you, you, during the presentation, I believe you listed, it was Mr. Cleveland who said thasaid he did detect a faint odor of alcohol but he didn't think that was impaired so I he. didn't do anything.
Well, why. was he smelling -breath if people didn't report that they thought he was drunk? Is he generally going around doing that, or how does that happen? How does that happen?MR. COUTU: I think it was through incidental COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.enr C? PARM RD.. WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 63/ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ii 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 contact with the individual.
He worked with the individual.
But let's let Mr. Craft relate his findings.MS. LONGO: Thank you.MR. CRAFT: Hello, my name again is Dan Craft.NMC had asked me to take a look at this investigation from an objective outsider point of view and --MR. ROGOFF: And he is our employee, but while he was still an outsider, new at the company, so there's no confusion there.MR. CRAFT: I did take a -- I was unfettered in my access and my ability to look at the entire investigation and then take it wherever I thought we needed to go with it. And I did interview Mr.and related to me the same incident that you are referring to where he was in an office with and came in and said that "Our hell child," meaning "and said that they don't want to work for an," expletive, "drunk." And' told me that two days.later he went and talked to Jabout that COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.(;0 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 64 1 and asked him about that incident and told 2 him that that's not what he said. That he said that 3 they needed to get some breath mints. So I 4 asked him exactly, and he said, well, that -- that 5 meant that. Qf as a drunk. But I 6 asked -- I told him that reasonable people can infer 7 that, but I wanted to know accurately, specifically, 8 what he had said? An had told that 9 breath mints. So it wasv 10 that was editorializing to me what he thought 1i1 meant, and I asked him not to do that but to be 12 accurate and that's how he came up with that 13 statement of told him that needed 14. breath mints.15 MS. LONGO: Okay. I'm sorry, could you please 16 tell me your name again? I'm bad with names.17 MR. CRAFT: Dan Craft.18 MS. LONGO: Craft. Mr. Craft. In your 19 re-investigation, did you talk to N 20 again? What I think is very significant is that the 21 person of concern whose fitness for duty was in 22 question told-us that dmitted in December, COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 65 1 "Yeah, these two guys came and told me they knew Mr.2 had a problem.".
3 MR. CRAFT: No, I did not.4 MS. LONGO: Are you aware of this? Did you 5 interview again?6 MR. CRAFT: No, I did not.7 MS. LONGO: Are you aware -- okay. Well, we 8 did, and so you can see where we're coming from.9 MR. CRAFT: Yes.10 MS. LONGO: Especially whe makes 11 an admission like this, we have to take it very 12 seriously.
This is against his interest; I think you 13 understand that.14 MR. CRAFT: Yes.15 MR. CAPRISTO:
In our supplement, Mr. Walker is 16 just -- Mr. Walker is just reviewing his extensive 17 notes, but we did intervie, I believe 18 it was in January 2002. If we could have a moment to 19 find the reference?
20 MR. DYER: While we're waiting, a question I 21 have, I'm trying to put together the time line on all 22 this. There was an initial investigation-that you COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.00 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 66 1 performed, then there was the supplemental 2 investigation that you performed, and then there was 3 our 01 investigation, and then there was an 4 independent review performed by Mr. Craft. I'm just 5 trying to put together a time line for these, you 6 know, when they overlap and where were we in the 7 process, if you would. So, Mr. Cleveland, can you 8 address that?9 MR. CLEVELAND:
Yeah, I think I can help clarify 10 that. We had the initial investigation conducted by 11 Mr. Hal Walker. And I think all those findings were 12 provided to you folks.13 MR. DYER: That's the report of February '02.14 MR. CLEVELAND:
Correct.15 We then, the next major data point, if 16 you will, would be in June of 2002 where we were 17 provided the document byalleging the 18 conversation that took place between and 19 the follow-up that we did on that 20 wherein we developed essentially the same thing that 21 your counsel is briefing regarding the reference to 22 "a drunk." COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.900 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 67 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 12 13 14 15 16 17 18:19 20 21 22 MR. WALKER: I think I can respond now.MR. CLEVELAND:
And then --MR. DYER: That's June '02.MR. CLEVELAND:
June of '02.MR. DYER: Aniddocument concerning what?MR. CLEVELAND:
He provided us a document .that alleged that a conversation had taken place between and "in which admits to -that people had come to him with the odor of alcohol, particularly and a Cand that we had interviewed them immediately following receipt of that and both denied the truthfulness, accuracy and, particularly, that the statement regarding odor of alcohol was not in fact made.MR. DYER: Is that what you're referring to as the supplemental investigation earlier?MR. CLEVELAND:
That was the investigation that we referred to that we did in June of 2002.MR. DYER: Okay.MS. LONGO: Could I interrupt at this point?COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 'N
-Nb-610ý68 1 This is again --2 MR. DYER: Ginny, before we get done I just want 3 to have them complete their time line.4 MS. LONGO: Oh, okay. We'll come back to it, 5 but, again, this is another disconnect and I think 6 it's important for you to understand what we have and 7 what you don't have on this point.8 MR. CLEVELAND:
Okay.9 MR. COUTU: I think it would be best to answer i0 Mr. Dyer's question, to start at the beginning when 11 the allegation occurred, when we started our initial 12 investigation, when we concluded it, when we denied 13 access, when we had the additional concerns raised, 14 when we began our supplemental investigation, when we 15 received the unsigned, quote-unquote, affidavit, et 16 cetera. And I think it would be really important for 17 us to go through that because this again goes back to 18 the fact that initially all of these people, except 19 for told us they never reported.
And 20 after we took action we had conflicting statements 21 beginning to develop and we went with the experience 22 of our investigators of when they typically get the COUNTY COURT REPORTERS., INC.9()n A. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 1 most truthful statements from individuals during 2 interviews, which is during the initial intervieý3 they typically get the most truthful information, 4 I think it's important to understand this time l1 5 understand when additional information surfaced 6 following actions that were taken.7 MR. CLEVELAND:
Okay, so anyway, Hal, do yoL 8 have the exact date of the supplemental investiga 9 so we can get that?10 MR. WALKER: The supplemental investigation.
11 MR. CLEVELAND:
While Hal is researching tha 12 will continue on.13 MR. WALKER: Two investigative reports were 14 prepared by me. One was closed January 7, 2002.it supplemental report was closed January 30th, 2002 16 MR. DYER: Okay, so both of those reports we 17 the basis for, I think, your letter to us of Febr 18 8?19 MR. CAPRISTO:
That's correct.20 MR. DYER: Okay.21 MR. CLEVELAND:
Then we go to the June time 22 frame.COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.M ICNTTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 70 1 MR. COUTU: When did we deny access?2 MR. CLEVELAND:
We denied access to the four 3 welders at the end of February 2002.4 MR. MADEDA: And that was and 6 MR. CLEVELAND:
7 MR. COUTU: When was their access placed on 8 hold?9 MR. CLEVELAND:
It was placed on hold, I would 10 have to specifically research that, Tom, but that was 11 approximately upon the discovery that the people did 12 not report the odor of alcohol we put it on hold.13 MR. COUTU: Which would have been during the 14 initial investigation phase --15 MR. CLEVELAND:
Correct.16 MR. COUTU: -- prior to the --17 MR. CLEVELAND:
December time frame of 2001.18 MR. BERSON: And just for completeness, when 19 were the individuals first notified or become aware 20 that their access had been put on hold or denied?21 MR. CLEVELAND:
The denial would have been by 22 letter at the end of February.COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 71 1 MR. BERSON: Okay.2 MR. COUTU: When did they know they were on 3 hold?4 MR. CLEVELAND:
They were not specifically 5 notified of being on hold. They didn't have access 6 at our site at the time, and this was not until we 7 actually denied access that we formally notified them 8 in writing.9 MR. BERSON: Okay.10 MR. CLEVELAND:
So then you go to the June time 11 frame. We talked about the receipt of the 12 information from the document alleging 13 the conversation that had taken place between Mr.14 M the follow-up we did to that, and 15 then that takes us to the follow-up work that Dan 16 Craft --17 MR. DYER: And when did Mr. Craft's 18 investigation
--19 MR. CLEVELAND:
The middle to the end of June 20 2003.21 MR. DYER: That was in preparation
-- that was 22 as a result of our letter to you?.COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 72 1 MR. ARENT: Yes.2 MR. DYER: Thank you.3 Ginny, go ahead.4 MS. PEDERSON:
Just a moment. Hal was going to 5 answer an earlier question.6 MR. WALKER: Yes. This is Walker again.7 Okay, on January 17th, January 17, 8 2001, I interviewed along with Mr.9 Capristo.
During that interview, he stated -- we 10 were talking about why he would offer himself up for 11 a for-cause testing --12 MR. ROGOFF: You said 2001. You meant to. say 13 2002, January 2002.14 MR. WALKER: I'm sorry, yeah, 2002.15 Anyway, was asked. why he 16 felt he had to defend himself .by voluntarily offering 17 to be for-cause tested. Well, he said he was willing 18 to be for-cause tested at any time.19 And who told 'him he had a smell of 20 alcohol on his breath, if he was offering himself for 21 for-cause testing? He stated that when in 22 August of 2001, or thereabouts told him that he --COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 73 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 is 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 that smelled of alcohol. And then the question was, well, whe told you that he smelled alcohol on your breath, did he volunteer to take a for-cause examination?
'said he was ready to be for-cause tested whel old him that he smelled the alcohol and has no idea why W jdid not proceed to have him tested.Then he went into are you friends with because there was a connection there that might have been giving him lenience because of We went on from that point to the next phase of questioning was I asked him have other individuals, other than' raised this concern with you? Causing you to have breath mints in the morning along with Scope, which was part of his commentary.
He said there was one other guy.asked who? He said, "I would rather not say." I said, "Was it a Day & Zimmerman NPS welder?" He said, "No." I said, "Was it a Kewaunee Nuclear Power Plant personnel?
Was it a supervisor?" He said someone told a supervisor that he had alcohol on his COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.4o q rYTThTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 74 1 breath. I said, "Was the supervisor Day & Zimmerman 2 or Nuclear Management?" He said it was Nuclear 3 Management, but he refused to tell me and Mr. Aldo --4 Mr. Capristo at that time who that individual was.5 So that's the questioning that went on.6 There was another thing in here, he 7 was talking about the subject of a breath mint and 8 things of that nature, that goes back to some other 9 issues we don't need to get into at this moment, but 10 that's in response to your question about aski~ng him 11 directly of others, questioning him on it.12 MS. LONGO: Okay.13 But, again, what we have is that he 14 made a statement to us, = that in 15 December, not in August 2001, but December, hI 16 came over and they visited and told him, 17 "Yeah, those two guys came and told me you were 18 either drunk or smelled of alcohol." 19 MR. WALKER: 1 ad 20 MS. LONGO: In August 2001.21 Andthis is admission 22 against interest.COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
75 1 MR. COUTU: That may be information that we do 2 not have.3 MR. WALKER: He had plenty of opportunity to 4 tell me the same thing and didn't. And at the end of 5 it, Mr. Capristo directly asked ' he 6 had ever reported to work in an unfit condition for 7 any reason. And his response was a clear "No." 8 MS. LONGO: Well, if he had a drinking problem, 9 that would not be surprising.
10 MR. WALKER: That wouldn't be surprising, but 11 the question was asked and answered.
And also these 12 others.13 MS. LONGO: Okay.14 MR. WALKER: It was asked and answered.15 MS. LONGO: And I want to come back to Mr. --16 I'm sorry, it's just me, you know, I'm just bad at 17 names. Mr. Cleveland, yeah, okay.18 What I wanted to bring up and 19 emphasize to you earlier was this poi'nt about your 20 re-interview of fter you found out about 21 this document, or supposedly says I had this 22 conversation with and said that these COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 76 two people said, or some people said that 2 smelled of alcohol. We also questioned 3 about that document, and told us the same 4 thing. No, *\did not say that people came and 5 reported thatQ smelled of alcohol. What 6 told me in December of 2001 was that two 7 people came and saido was drunk.8 MR. CLEVELAND:
The statement
--9 MR. COUTU: "Was drunk" or "was a drunk"?10 MS. LONGO: No, not "was a drunk," but was drunk 11 at the time.12 MR. CLEVELAND:
The information that we had 13 gotten from is that-hed 14 admitted to him that these two individuals did not 15 want to work for a drunk. We did not receive 16 information indicating that they considered him drunk 17 at work, no specific behaviors which were referenced, 18 including the odor of alcohol, indicating that 19 something had occurred or been observed at work which 20 was actionable.
21 This was clearly through the sum total 22 of the interviewing that we did, there was, if you COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 77 will, the urban legend throughout that was a drunk or a heavy drinker. But in terms of specific behaviors at work, we did several interviews, including one that was developed for us as a source that we could interview which would truly know whether",as unfit at work or had the odor of alcohol, this was a his supervisor., ork worked'since 1985, between August of 2001 and November of 2001 he had daily contact with 3pproxima.tely three to four times a day, stopped by office every morning and never had occasion to question his fitness for duty or ever detected the odor of alcohol.MR. ROGOFF: If I might, I have a document that Mr. Craft developed.
He asked in his interviews for to mark up this document (indicating), that you probably have all seen, that would make it true.And this is the original copy. It's written Vol handwriting.
And when he writes, he says what he does is he marks up that document that you've seen and he writes, 'lnformed me COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD.', WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 78 1 that he spoke to Harold Walker the allegations that 2 (o 1 that's in the print, and then in 3 this blue ink in the hand of "would not 4 work for him because he's a drunk." That's what he 5 wrote. "He's a drunk." He didn't write --6 MS. LONGO: Sir, that refers to the August 7 incident, but what I am talking about is December.8 What tol n December was that these 9 two had reported that was at the time 10 drunk. At the time drunk. That's what he told us.11 And we questioned
-- he discussed it at some length, 12 so what I'm telling you is that I'm not interpreting 13 what we have. That is what we have.14 MR. ROGOFF: Maybe Mr. Craft-can come here, come 15 back to the table and speak to what the time frame is 16 that's being addressed here.17 MS. LONGO: Okay. And it's possible we are 18 talking about two different times.19 MR. CRAFT: It's my understanding
-- excuse me, 20 Dan Craft again.21 It's my understanding 22 didn't work at either of these facilities in the late COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.4nn A. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 79-' 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Ii 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 fall of 2001, that he stopped working at some time in October of 2001.MS. LONGO: -Right. But why is that important?
MR. CLEVELAND:
"1 think you -- the point you're trying to make is you're trying to nail down the reference in time as to when the statement was made, correct? It was in the December -- the late 2001-early 2002 time frame?MS. LONGO: Yes, because -made two statements about what asaid. He made a statement about what said in August when everybody was employed.at the plant, and he made a'statement about. what told him privately in December of 2001. And what I am talking about, and the disconnect between what you've got and what I've-got is about December 2001. You have got part of what I've got. What you have is that is telling you, "Yeah, did not say to me in December 2001 that these two welders came and said-.smells of alcohol."'
You have that, we have that. But we-also have a statement by the same time, he said, "Yeah, idn't say, COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC..... ,Tnrrv ZLPM rn.. WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 80 1 anything about smell of alcohol. What he said, what 2 told me was these two guys said that 3 was drunk at the time." Not "a drunk." 4 "Was drunk." And I think you don't have that, from 5 what I understand.
I'm not criticizing you. I'm 6 just trying to, you know, make sure you understand 7 where we're coming from and that I understand where 8 you're coming from.9 MR. COUTU: It's a little difficult to do that 10 without having both sides of the -- of what's been 11 revealed in interviews.
We only have what we have, 12 which is a tremendous number of conflicting 13 statements, like, "He was loaded every morning" 14 versus, "I don't know anything about him being 15 drunk." And we're having difficulty.
You may in 16 fact have information that we don't have. That's 17 probably part of our frustration.
What we'll try to 18 do is give you the information that we developed.
It 19 does not surprise me that you may have information 20 that conflicts with ours since we have information 21 that conflicts with our own information from the same 22 sources.COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 81 1 So, again, I think Mr. Walker is the 2 best individual to talk about statements being made 3 by individuals about impairment on the job.4 MR. ROGOFF: I think there's an important point.5 If I might, I think the one thing we want to do here, 6 since we believe, Mr. Craft's best recollection is 7 that in the time frame in which you are stating the 8 statement was made, that was not working --9 not. So the conversation 10 would not have occurred.
That's something that ought 11 to be verifiable one way or the other by going back 12 to records; right? Site records? Whether they were 13 on-site or not?14 MR. CLEVELAND:
That definitely would be 15 verifiable.
I think the couple of points that we're 16 discussing here is, one, what statement didor.17 make toin December?
We'll use 18 that time frame. And then, what was the reference 19 that was made in the office back in the July-August 20 time frame of 2001; correct?21 MS. LONGO: Correct. And I just want to point 22 out that this conversation between" and COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 -S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 82 1 in December was not on the site. -said it 2 was, you know, I can't remember, it was his apartment 3 ord apartment, but it was not on the site.4 They were not on the site, so your site records are 5 not going tell you anything about whether they had a 6 conversation.
7 MR. CLEVELAND:
Correct. And we understand 8 that. We believe a --9 MS. LONGO: Okay.10 MR. CLEVELAND:
The conversation took place in 11 V aiUMapartment.
: 12. MR. ROGOFF: Which conversation, Randy?13 MR. CLEVELAND:
The-December conversation.
14 MR. COUTU: There's two. There's one that 15 allegedly took place in his apartment and one that 16 allegedly took place in that -- in the Day &17 Zimmerman offices.18 MR. CLEVELAND:
Correct, back in the July-August 19 time frame.20 MS. LONGO: Okay.21 And the other thing I wanted to point 22 out, I'm not so sure that there is a conflict in what COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 83 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8..9 10 I1 12 13 14 is 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 we have. It's simply that we have additional information, and that's why we, in the synopsis, we tried to summarize it to you. Now that synopsis, unfortunately, did not include the information about -- which is really the most troubling, I think, is Mstatement to us, he admits that said, "Yeah, these two guys reported that you, drunk." MS. PEDERSON:
What I would --MS. LONGO: At the time so --MS. PEDERSON:
Since we --MR. CLEVELAND:
Hal Walker has something to add.MR. WALKER:. Yeah, can I add something here?You're talking abou kay, and you're talking about December.
Do you have a definitive date in December?
Or is it just a December date that he had --MS. LONGO: I think it was-in December.MR. WALKER: In December, okay.December 11, Tuesday, December.12, approximately 8:00 p.m., I had a conversation with a telephone.
You are correct, he was not COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC... COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 84 1 working at the site. He was working at a 2 different
-- he was not working for NMC at that time.3 And a lot of this has to do with other issues, but 4 when I got to this I asked 91 again, arnd I 5 don't know how -- any way to ask these people,.6 Ware you aware of any D&Z NPS employees working 7 inside the protected area in violation of fitness for 8 duty policy?" I'm not trying to limit it to smell, 9 I'm not trying to limit it to dope or whatever.
He 10 states to me that he said he was unaware of anyone 11 working at Kewaunee in violation of the policy.12 So I went further. I said, 13 do. you know," I asked him if he  14 And I'll get to it, everybody appears to 15 have known so he knew 16 And there was some insinuation at one point tha .17 1000 didn't do something because was 18 friends with his. i or something of that nature.19 So I asked him, Wjaid he knew as 20 an individual who had worked with 21 at both Kewaunee and Point Beach for many years. And 22 had worked in the same service, inspection service.COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 85 1 I asked him if he had smelled anything 2 on the breath of was asked 3 if he had ever had smelled alcohol to any extent on 4 the breath of and said he has not 5 smelled alcohol on the breath ofwhile 6 working at Kewaunee.7 further said that 8 would have reported to work, walk by his office 9 informing him or that he was present and 10 go on about his day. And that was his total of his il comments to me, and this took place December 11th.12 So, if he had these kind of conversations, this was 13 very open to him to make his comments to me and he 14 didn't.15 MS. LONGO: Mr. Walker, the conversation between 16 4!!Pj I 'and 411." was in December.
Now I 17 don't know when in December.
Your conversation with 18 Wj-was December 11th.19 MR. WALKER: That's correct.20 MS. LONGO: And a reference at another place in 21 somebody else's -- somebody else had a conversation 22 with -- the two people had conversations with Mr.COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Ii 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19.20 21 22 86 about this August incident apparently were very close in time and the other person said he thought'it was around the holidays, which would be after December 11th.MR. WALKER: Or around Thanksgiving.
MS. LONGO: Well, no, the testimony was December, January, around the holidays.MR. WALKER: Okay.MS. LONGO: But the person is talking about Christmas, New Year, so I think what it sounded to me like, after putting everything together, it looks to me like this conversation, these two admissions that made to -ad to ere around the Christmas holiday, which would have been after your discussion of December l1th, which was why ---wouldn't have mentioned it.MR. WALKER: Okay.MS. LONGO: Okay. And --MR. WEIL: Ginny, excuse me a minute?MS. LONGO: Yeah.MR. WEIL: I may have a point of clarification that might help as far as a date. Mr. Walker, it COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 appE intE all.87 ears the conversation between occurred some time in December after your.rviews with if that helps you at MR. WALKER: What about my interview with*was interviewed on two occasions.
MR. WEIL: I understand.
I can't place that, but I can place it after your interview with -- at least one of your interviews with MR. WALKER: Okay.MR. WEIL: That's all I can do right now.-MS. LONGO: Okay.MR. ROGOFF: Could we just have Mr. Craft -- you know, Mr. Craft did go back then and re-interview" and maybe, Dan, you could just review a little bit of, you know, did You. givan opportunity to talk about the smell of alcohol and the state of -- physical state o MR. CRAFT: Yes. L old me that nobody ever cameto him and reported that smelled COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 88 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ii 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 of alcohol or had been drinking.MS. LONGO: Are you speaking of couldn't hear.MR. CRAFT: Yeah, MS. LONGO: Okay.MR. ROGOFF: So, this conversation would have been well after the December time frame when, given the opportunity, he didn't come forward with that information.
Which is not to say he didn't say it before, but it's just not what he told us.MR. DYER: Let me ask a question first. I guess the question I have is: Mr. Craft just said that said nobody had Come to him about concern about j fitness for duty?MR. CRAFT: Correct.MR. DYER: I think the question, and what Ginny was asking was, had had conversations with about somebody coming to MR. CRAFT: Correct.MR. DYER: Now, did you verify or --MR. CRAFT: Yes.MR. DYER: And he said that discussion did not COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 89 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 occur?MR. CRAFT: No, that -- if I understand your question right, did someone go to *"ýabout MR. DYER: Basically, what I understood Miss Longo to say, and correct me if I'm wrong, Ginny, was that we have evidence that says thati S'was told by --that somebody had cbme to him about fitness for duty.MR. CRAFT: Correct.MS. LONGO: Right. That he was drunk at the time. There was no mention of smell of alcohol. And this gets me back to my point is you keep on focusing on "smell of alcohol," but that's not what people were talking about.MR. CRAFT: No, that's correct, it was --MR. DYER: The question, in fact, is not whether had direct knowledge, or somebody had come directly toi It was more was he aware thad i~knew?MR. CRAFT: Right. But I asked him that anyway, to be thorough, to see did anybody come to him.COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 90 1 But to answer your question, yes, this 2 conversation between nd had taken 3 place, but there's a slightly different 4 interpretation or version. Whated told me 5 that -told him is that --6 MS. LONGO: Well, di tell you that 7 4001said, "Nobody ever told me that there was 8 any kind of problem with k11 " -A4-1f] ' did" 9 say that?10 MS. PEDERSON:
Ginny, can we let Mr. Craft 11 finish his summary, please?12 MS. LONGO: Okay.13 MS. PEDERSON:
Thank you.14 MR. CRAFT: I had asked a specific question, did 15 W ever confront ith this? The fact 16 that did anybody ever come to him with the smell of 17 alcohol. o 1eing unfit for duty and so 18 forth. An told me that he did have a 19 conversation in apartment where he 20 specifically asked him about this and it was the 21 version, the accurate -- I had him write it down in 22 his own handwriting (indicating), is that and COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 91 didn't want to work for ecause he was 2 a drunk. Not "drunk," but "a drunk." And I asked 3 him about the affidavit and why he didn't sign it?4 He said because it wasn't accurate.
So I asked him, 5 well, what would make it accurate?
And he told me 6 the series of corrections.
I had him correct it, 7 initial it on each of the corrections and then sign 8 it, and then I actually signed it as a witness to him 9 signing it on June 27th of this year.10 MS. LONGO: Mr. Craft, in addition --11 MS. PEDERSON:
Did he elaborate at all on the 12 context of him being "a drunk"? Was there any 13 further exploration of what that meant? Whether on 14 site, off site, anything further in that regard?15 MR. CRAFT: No. And jhad talked to 16 bout it, about these -- this conversation, 17 had -- did not witness, himself, any fitness for 18 duty, didn't see the slurring of the speech or the 19 bloodshot eyes or the gait or anything; that he could 20 smell an almost faint, imperceptible smell of old 21 alcohol, like if he had a lot to drink the night 22 before, went-to bed early and then just got up in'the COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 92 1 morning and didn't clean up. That seemed to be his 2 explanation of that.3 1 asked-about that too and 4 that he had socialized with M Ohhaand that 5 was a heavy drinker, that he would drink at 6 night, then go to bed, 8:30, 9:00 o'clock, the latest 7 would be 9:30, and he would drink all the way up 8 until he went to bed, get up in the morning and come 9 to work and he would have this residual smell of 10 alcohol.11 MS. PEDERSON:
But no one caused -- that didn't 12 cause him to take a for-cause test, no when asked 13 that he take a for-cause test?14 MR. CRAFT: Correct. It wa opinion, 15 based upon being a supervisor
-- and he would also 16 say that, you know, he knew the history of 17 for twenty-some years and that he had this 18 reputation, he had this smell about him.19 .had supervised for years and 20 had had him tested 15 times, always negative.
That 21 he had taken this medication that made him smell.22 That he had a problem with his throat, that it didn't COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 93 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 is 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 close properly, that any residual odor would still linger. So -was aware of it, but he also told me that he would watch him and check and he did his job and that's what he was -- he,.M was concerned with: Was he fit for duty? And did he do his job? He didn't want to get hung up in the scuttlebutt or the mudslinging because of this reputation and people, you know, bad-mouthing He was more concerned-with did he do his job and was he fit for duty? And his professional opinion at the time, and we can argue whether it was right or wrong, it was his judgment that he was fit for duty.MS. PEDERSON:
And elied on the behavioral observation to make that statement?
MR. CRAFT:, Yes.MS. PEDERSON:
Or that observation he was fit for duty, even though he was aware he was a heavy drinker, he chose not to have a for-cause test MR. CRAFT: Correct.
challenge him, COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.r OTrKThTV VARM RD.. WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 94 1 say, "If you think I'm drunk, let's go right now, 2 take me for a test," a idn't. Now, that 3 may be an error in judgment, and I think NMC had 4 counseled him on that and taken corrective action, 5 that that's not permissible in our sites, but that 6 was his opinion at the time given the circumstances, 7 and he did what he did why he did it.8 MS. PEDERSON:
Thank you.9 MR. COUTU: I think also to put in perspective 10 maybe the two individuals that claimed to have this 11 conversation, one of those individuals was also the 12 individual who said, quote, "loaded every morning," 13 "The ,foremarnlwas loaded every morning'" and later was 14 reported to say, "I don't know anything about him 15 being drunk." That he was escorted to the collection 16 point by the foreman and it turned out he was not 17 escorted to the collect collection point by the 18 foreman. That the collector recognized the foreman 19 as being "a little ripe"; and neither of the 20 collectors interviewed corroborated even the fact 21 that the individual escorted, that the foreman 22 escorted the individual to the collectors' site, nor COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 95 1 making a remark that the foreman was "a little ripe." 2 We also-have the claims, the erroneous 3 claims that individuals went through an access portal 4 together, one was pulled out of line for for-cause 5 testing, which our records do not substantiate; they 6 only substantiate a random test at some point after 7 that in the day.8 You know, we could focus on one 9 statement made by this individual, but my sense is, 10 to get a real picture of what we are dealing with 11 here, you've got focus on the numerous conflicting 12 statements that this individual gave us. And we 13 went -- we went to NMC employees who work with this 14 individual to try to determine whether or not there 15 were any cases of unfitness for duty.16 Mr. Walker?17 MR. WALKER: Yes?18 MR. COUTU: How many people would you say you 19 overall interviewed?
And did any of them give you an 20 indication that there was ever a time that .21 was on-site unfit for duty?22 MR. WALKER: In both these investigations, with COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 96 1 all these issues included about 34 individuals I 2 interviewed.
Out of those 34 individuals, 13 I 3 interviewed.directly regarding a fitness for duty 4 issue with or whatever they could find 5 out. Not one individual indicated to me that they 6 observed any impairment in this individual.
I went 7 over very clearly, that was part of the testing that 8 was done in their training department and those 9 exhibits...
10 Now also another individual, a*.11 A I will bring up now, who is really the person 12 who was -- the person who was in the alleged incident 13 wherein was tested and _as the 14 alleged reason for this drift of the smell back on 15 him causing him to be tested. I had this interview 16 with on December 9th, Sunday, December 9th 17 at approximately 7:00 p.m., and what he -- he told me 18 that it was not uncommon for to smell 19 of alcohol in the mornings but not appear to be 20 impaired.21 And I went after him again and I said 22 to the extent, I asked him why he did not bring COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 97 1 behavior to the attention of management, 2 or any appropriate party? He said that if he had 3 seen while on the job stumbling around 4 he would have turned him in to the appropriate 5 parties; however, according t 6 as running a crew, and if he was that bad 7 why didn't his crew turn him in?8 Now, I have to say that of everybody 9 here, no one expressed to me that the man exhibited 10 any impairment other than this smell of alcohol, 11 which seems to be pervasive.
I talked to Mr.12 Capristo, I said if we interviewed everybody on the 13 site, probably how many would say they smelled a 14 faint smell of alcohol onn Because it is came almost like this rumor, I interviewed other 16 individuals, al nd he was talking, 17 discussing about, well, the alleged incident wherein 18 Uad went through and another individual 19 had been tested. This seemed to be a pervasive 20 thought of him smelling of alcohol based on that 21 event which, to me, looks like a -- people just knew 22 him as, I hate to, quote-unquote, "a drunk." So this COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 98 one individual stated to me, he said non-nuclear jobs he smelled alcohol on him, but never on nuclear. Now where is the impairment?
I didn't see it. No one brought it to my attention.
MR. CLEVELAND:
You also have to balance the results of those interviews with interviews of other individuals, credible individuals, such as hich I detailed, who, again, had very regular contact wit daily, multiple times per day, very close proximity, early in the morning and never detected neither the odor of alcohol, or had reason to question his fitness. He is not unique.we did a follow-up with him based on Mr. Walker's initial results, and he too indicated that he had --MR. ROGOFF: You know, I think this is the first time you're referring to Can you identify him?MR. CLEVELAND:
Ws another craft worker out there whom iUww w ould go to occasionally to get some advice or help with the ISI project. So he had some somewhat regular contact COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 99 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 with and, again, never detected the odor of alcohol or had any reason to question fitness for duty.Another individual which we interviewed, this was part, again, of Dan Craft's follow-up, ahe is the NPSýeneral foremannhat was hired onF/30 of 2001, and we interviewed him and he again indicated that he had multiple contacts withQ .never had any reason to question his fitness, did not detect the odor of alcohol and believed him to be a very reliable worker.Lso elaborated that'it's his belief, based on what he characterized as attitude, the attitude problem of nd dthat if they had had a concern which they believed was not being addressed adequately, they would have gone to other folks in the chain at the time.And Ailso partially corroborated our concern with the June 26 statements that we identify in the employee file of COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 100 1 MR. ROGOFF: And if I could just make one more 2 point about what we call -- we can call this document 3 an "Affidavit" now, after it's been executed.
That 4 it was done on June 27th of this year, so it was done 5 three weeks ago. Yes, it speaks to the March 6 conversation, but there would have been ample 7 opportunity when he marked this up to have said, "I 8 had a separate conversation in December," so --9 MR. DYER: What document are you talking about?10 I'm confused.11 MR. ROGOFF: I'm talking about the document that 12 was titled "Affidavit" that was never executed, which 13 I believe Ms. Longo referred to in her conversation, 14 and that Mr. Craft, when he interviewed 15 who now seems to be kind of providing the smoking gun 16 facts, you know, that seems -- we were not aware of, 17 that I think it is --he asked- to take the 18 document and in his hand to mark it up. This is the 19 original copy, you can see the blue, perhaps you 20 can't read it, but the blue ink.here and initialed 21 some changes to this. And each-time that he refers, 22 he talks about "a drunk," not "drunk." Admittedly, COUNTY COURT REPORTERS., INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 101 1 as Miss Longo correctly pointed out, this refers to 2 the March conversation, not to December --3 MS. LONGO: To the August, August. August.4 There was no March conversation.
5 MR. CLEVELAND:
I believe the affidavit refers 6 to a conversation in March of 2002.7 MR. WEIL: If I may at this point, counsel?8 MR. ROGOFF: Yes, sir.9 MR. WEIL: Our interview, of course, was 10 transcribed under oath and our information from 11 " bout his conversation in December 12 and he was referring back to nd 13 and we believe going back to --14 remember, we're focusing on one issue in July of 15 2001. So going back to that, the conversation is, 16 "He had been drinking and was a drunk." That's the 17 quote.18 MR. ROGOFF: But could you read the question and 19 the answer so we have some context there?20 MR. WEIL: No, I don't want to go into that 21 because we're still predecisional, sir.22 MR. ROGOFF: Okay.COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 102 1 MR. WEIL: Just, please, take my word for it.2 MR. COUTU: Are you saying he had been drinking 3 on the job? Or he had been drinking the night 4 before?5 MR. WEIL: Sir, all we know, sir, is that it was 6 in the fabrication shop, this conversation came to 7 by the three welders. I'll set the 8 ground there. It was the fab shop, the limited 9 control area, had access to the protected 10 area.11 MR. ROGOFF: Could you just read the quote again 12 for me?13 MR. WEIL: "I remember him saying 'drinking' and 14 'was a drunk.'" 15 MR. COUTU: But its hard to understand the 16 context --17 MR. WEIL: I understand.
18 MS. LONGO: If you will hold on a second. I 19 have --20 MR. WEIL: Ginny, let me finish one other thing.21 MS. LONGO: Right. And when you're through I'm 22 going to add something.
There's additional stuff in COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 103 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 the testimony.
I don't mean to --MR. WEIL: Well, I'll let you decide how much you want to go to.But one thing I want to furnish to Mr.Walker is continues that" h...... ad stated that he denied to Mr. Walker that he had had'a conversation with and NO MR. WALKER: Right.MR. WEIL: So, going to your conversation, Mr.Walker.So, Ginny, it's yours.MS. LONGO: If you will just hang on a second 13 here?14 MR. BERSON: 15 MS. LONGO: 16 about the affidavi 17 l aid thatj 18 they smelled alcoh 19 says, like I said, 20 said they wouldn't 21 he'd been drinking 22 that "he was a dru: This might be ---stated, when he was asked t and the affidavit says that nd had reported that ol
* Riaid they came to him and work for him. That they thought and was a drunk problem." Not nk." "He had been drinking." COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 104 1 MR. ROGOFF: Did I hear you to read, quote, "he 2 then drinking"?
I may have misheard.3 MS. LONGO: He -- I'm sorry, "He'd been 4 drinking." 5 MR. BERSON: "He'd been drinking." 6 MS. LONGO: "He had been drinking." 7 MR. COUTU: And did you establish what they 8 meant by that? He had been drinking on the job? He 9. had been drinking the night before?10 MS. LONGO: Well, I think since these people 11 were on the job, since n was on the job, and 12 wan' ere on the job and they reported on 13 the job that they thought had been drinking, 14 what does it matter whether he was drinking on-site, 15 or just before, or the night before? If they thought 16 he was clearly, you know, showed signs of being 17 drunk?18 MR. COUTU: I didn't hear that in your 19 statement.
20 MS. LONGO: Well, why did they think he'd been 21 drinking unless he was -- clearly showed some signs 22 of having been drinking?
Something was wrong.COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 1 MR. ROGOFF: I think it was because there we 2 MS. LONGO: Is that not to you an indicatior 3 that somebody might be impaired?
Is that not a 4 report of a fitness for duty problem?5 MR. ROGOFF: I think it was 6 regular behavior to drink. I mean nobody doubts 7 that. You know, our belief and our conclusion wa 8 that it was confined to after hours, so that when 9 somebody says "he had been drinking," there wasn'10 any -- there's no news in that statement just in 11 of itself. Unless one can establish, I think, is 12 what Mr. Coutu is asking, that they're --13 MS. LONGO: Well, if mister --14 MR. COUTU: I guess in reality, its irreleva 15 Its irrelevant in that we did not have that same 16 statement in our investigation.
So, we if we agr 17 today that you probably have some information or 18 have had some information or different statements 19 than what we received, I think it's wrong for eit 20 of Us to infer what it meant. But it is a statem 21 that we obviously don't have in our investigation 22 MR. DYER: Let me back up. Let me ask a COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 106 1 question here, I think, and redirect this a little 2 bit. You know, the violation we're looking about 3 doesn't go todrinking problem. It 4 goes to what did know, or what was he 5 told? And I think that what we're telling you is 6 that we have independent information that says that 7 -cknowledges being told by the two 8 individuals, regardless of their motives, that, the 9 way we understood it, thatL was -- had a 10 fitness for duty problem. You know, whether he is a 11 drunk, drinking, whatever it was, if an employee 12 comes to their supervisor and makes this, "I don't 13 want to work for a drunk," and, you.know, is that the 14 type that you want to make an distinction as to 15 whether he's drinking after work and he's hung over 16 in the morning? or, you know, does that raise enough 17 of a concern to cause a for-cause fitness for duty 18 test? That's-sort of where we are, and what didM 19 know? So, I don't want to get into whether 20 or not-mister
-- the history of-21 drinking.
It's a question of what did 22 know? And if you -- you know, what was your basis COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 107 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1.1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 for making your investigation?
It's obvious our investigation has different conclusions than yours did, and I think Ginny. And we've shared with you that going to independent third parties who were relating conversations, other conversations of would indicate that these individuals had come to him, regardless of the motives, and provided some sort of an accusation that he wasn't fit for duty, that w wasn't fit for duty. So if there's a questions
-'if you have something on that, we don't need to get into the debate, did he have a drinking problem or anything else like that. It's more directed as to what did know?MR. ROGOFF: Randy,. could I ask you if you had what you believed to be credible evidence that the individuals had gone to'and had st.ated something that you believed that to be credible, had come to him and said that he had been drinking, with the inference or the direct statement of on the job, or was impaired on the job, would your decision have been different with respect to COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.... ....-f n n Att.7 1 nT TT.. (630) 653-1622 108 2 MR. CLEVELAND:
Absolutely.
Yes.3 And the focus was exactly -- that's an 4 excellent point that you made. The focus of our 5 investigation, we were trying to determine whether 6 anyone had come to Vwith specific 7 articulable,, actionable observations regarding 8 81fitness.
You really, in a case like 9 this, you can't entirely pull it away from the 10 context of what was known about"O 13 Clearly, cknowledged tha' as 12 known as a, quote-unquote, "drinker," but based on 13 his personal behavior observation, he did not have a 14 basis for initiating a test or taking further action.15 Now, he was counseled by NMC on making 16 a more conservative decision with respect to what he 17 considered the imperceptible faint odor, but in terms 18 of people coming to him with a specific concern 19 regarding fitness --20 MR. ROGOFF: Randy, if you would speak more 21 directly to Mr. Dyer's question with respect to the 22 credibility, the conclusion you drew with respect to COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC..... PC V r n N TT. (f;1AV) 653-1622 109 1 the credibility of the individuals who stated that 2 they went to Because I think the 3 gravamen of the concern has been perfectly expressed 4 here, and we've been through this hour upon hour upon 5 hour, by Mr. Dyer and that is how we came to the 6 conclusion that it was not credible that the 7 individuals had gone to 8 MR. CLEVELAND:
Ultimately, what we concluded 9 about was he didn't go to supervision.
He 10 was on record with this, he did not go anywhere with 11 the odor of alcohol. He didn't indicate in the 12 initial interviews that there was any other concerns 13 that he had gone.14 MR. WALKER: If I may? January 15th I had two 15 conversations wit based upon conversations 16 from .This was a telephone call with him 17 down south. He's in the7N 18 Local. What he told me was that regarding the smell 19 of alcohol, it wasn't just limited to a smell of 20 alcohol, as Miss Longo suggests, was an FFD issue.21 This was directly related to what they were telling 22 me about the smell of alcohol. He said at this time.COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.'L7ýM n TPWT M.~i\ TT.. (lO') 653-1622 110 1 while working inside the protected area, two people 2 occasionally smelled of alcohol. He identified the 3' two individuals who smelled of alcohol as  4 and This is the first time 5 anybody suggested thatl 5smelled of alcohol 6 at any point in time. It was never corroborated in 7 any of my other interviews.
.8 as asked if he reported the 9 smelled of alcohol to his immediate supervision?
I 10 don't think we can ignore this on two occasions.-
He 11 said he did not report his concerns.
So, I asked him 12 specifically, "What did do you? I want to know what 13 you did with it?" He said he didn't report *his 14 concerns because then, he said, "Look at it from my 15 point of view," and then he talked about being*16 I think we're all aware in this room what 17 bein3.ng tin a union. He says, "Look at it 18 from my point of view. I'm working out of a union 19 hall," which 20 21 22 J He said he didn't want COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.NoN ;. CoCNTY FARM RD.. WHEATON. IL. (630) 653-1622 il 1 to create waves, so he kept his eyes open and his 2 mouth shut.3 Now, when he talked -- he talked to me 4 a little bit more, he talked about he wanted to --5 he iýtalked about going to the employee 6 concerns, or wanting to go to employee concerns.
So 7 looking at my notes, I hadn't really went into that 8 in-depth so I called him back at 7:55 p.m. Now, I 9 had to call one place, they had to go get him and 10 bring him back so he could talk to me on the phone, 11 so this was a -- there was a -- it wasn't an 12 immediate, there was a lot of deliberate thought 13 there. I asked him what he meant about what he said 14 earlier and he again reiterated to me that he did not 15 tell anyone of the smell of alcohol. So he had an 16 opportunity to tell me about that. He didn't on two 17 occasions in that same day.18 MR. COUTU: And later claimed that he did. Or 19 was one of the twoparties that did. In much the 20 same way that we got conflicting statements from Mr.21 So, we have an issue here which is, if you 22 take anyone's statement made by an individual, you COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.-.iTrvvrrM%7vD y WWN TON. IL. (630) 653-1622 112 1 can support a conclusion.
If you look at all of the 2 statements made by the individuals and you look at 3 our initial assertion that four of the five people 4 said they did not report, it, they did not report, 5 okay? The/fthjone gave a series of conflicting 6 statements and uncorroborated evidence who happened 7 to be the other individual that allegedly went too 8 had to form an opinion on whether or not 9 these people really did report, and our conclusion 10 was they did not.11 We could take any one statement.
We 12 could take the statement, you know, the initial 13 statements of individuals and then discount the other 14 ones. We had to take all of the information, come to 15 a reasonable conclusion about whether or not we had 16 impairment on the job and in fact the individuals did 17 report that. Our conclusion was, from the 18 information that we had, that that didn't happen.19 We clearly admit, we believe 20 ,jN-J .__ had a drinking problem. Did it manifest 21 itself as impairment on the job or fitness for duty 22 on the job? We were unable to find any information, COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 113 1 exclusive of these statements, which were in conflict 2 with other statements that there were cases of 3 impairment on the job by multiple sources, so we made 4 a reasonable judgment regarding whether or not those 5 reports were in fact made.6 As it turns out there's a whole lot 7 more information on this affidavit.
Ce of.8 individuals has since ....We're 9 not going into motives for that, but there -- there 10 is -- there's a great deal going on here.11 MS. PEDERSON:
Are there any further questions 12 from the NRC on this?13 MS. LONGO: Okay, no further questions.
And I 14 thank you for, .you know, going through the details of 15 what you did and what you have.16 MR. WEIL: I do.17 MS. LONGO: Okay, thank you.18 MS. PEDERSON:
Chuck?i9 MR. WEIL: Mr. Walker, just a few short 20 questions.
21 In your interviews as a professional 22 investigator do you normally share your interview COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
114 1 notes with the person you interview?
114 1 notes with the person you interview?
2 MR. WALKER: Do you mean the results of their 3 interview?
2      MR. WALKER:    Do you mean the results      of their 3 interview?
4 MR. WEIL: No, your actual interview notes? The 5 notes you take during the interview.
4      MR. WEIL:  No,  your actual interview notes?          The 5 notes you take during the interview.
6 MR. WALKER: No.7 MR. WEIL: I notice in the interview 8 ;that you had him read your actual interview 9 notes and initial them and date them. Could you 10 please explain why you did that, sir?11 MR. WALKER: Yes, I will. Because initially 12 when I spoke to -on the 5th, I believe, of 13 December, I had I asked him the question, which I 14 have already told you folks, I asked him about 15 fitness for duty, and was there any -- I can read it 16 again, but it's about fitness for duty. He said 17 there was none.18 Then I went and I interpret
6      MR. WALKER:    No.
--I then 19 intervveewd-who told me that--20 of the issue and said that, when I asked him why he 21 didn't tell anybody or report it, he said, "Well, the 22 supervisors all know it." Which caused me to go back COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.
7      MR. WEIL:      I notice in    the interview of*
115 1 t go in-depth into the interview 2 with him again. I wanted to determine if in fact he 3 did have any smell of alcohol. And throughout that, 4 1 had him look at the previous notes, Chuck, Mr.5 Weil, and look at it and then at the conclusion of it 6 I had him write down in his own hand why he didn't --7 or why he arrived at the conclusion that he did, that 8 it didn't need to be reported, which was the 9 five-hours.
8            ;that you had him read your actual        interview 9 notes and initial      them and date them.      Could you 10 please    explain why you did that,      sir?
And I thought it was important, because 10 of my own intent to get to *the bottom of it, to have 12 his, as the note implicated, in the notes for him to 12 say whatever is accurate, what wasn't accurate, and 13 write down why he didn't report it. That was the 14 one -- I hardly ever do that, but it was significant 15 enough for me to make sure that you, the reader, got 16 an opportunity to see what he was saying to me.17 That's why I did it in this case.18 MR. WEIL: Thank you. It just stood out and I 19
11      MR. WALKER:    Yes,  I will. Because initially 12 when I    spoke to        -on          the 5th,  I believe,    of 13 December,    I had I  asked him the question,      which I 14 have already told you folks,          I asked him about 15 fitness    for duty,    and was there any --      I can read it 16 again,  but it's    about fitness for duty.        He said 17 there was none.
18                    Then I went and I    interpret    --  I  then 19 intervveewd-                            who told me that--
20 of the issue and said that,        when I asked him why he 21 didn't tell    anybody or report it,      he said,    "Well,  the 22 supervisors    all  know it."    Which caused me to go back COUNTY COURT REPORTERS,    INC.
 
115 1 t                    *and  go in-depth        into the interview 2 with him again.          I wanted to determine if              in    fact he 3 did have any smell of alcohol.                  And throughout          that, 4  1 had him look at the previous notes,                    Chuck,    Mr.
5 Weil,    and look at it        and then at the conclusion of it 6 I had him write down in            his own hand why he didn't --
7 or why he arrived at the conclusion that he did,                          that 8 it  didn't      need to be reported,          which was the 9 five-hours.        And I    thought it        was important,        because 10  of my own intent to get

Latest revision as of 00:10, 23 March 2020

Note to Congel Et Al., from Weil, Enforcement Conference Transcript
ML062790355
Person / Time
Site: Kewaunee Dominion icon.png
Issue date: 07/22/2003
From: Weil C
NRC/RGN-III/ORA/EICS
To: Congel F, Dambly D, Pederson C
NRC/OE, NRC/OGC, Division of Reactor Safety III
References
EA-03-105, FOIA/PA-2006-0113
Download: ML062790355 (149)
v • d • e


Text

July 22, 2003 EA-03-105 NOTE TO: Frank J. Congel, OE Dennis Dambly, OGC Cindy Pederson, DRS FROM: Chuck Weil, EICS

SUBJECT:

ENFORCEMENT CONFERENCE TRANSCRIPT Attached for your review is the transcript from the closed predecisional enforcement conference on July 16, 2003, with Nuclear Management Company concerning a fitness for duty issue and incomplete/inaccurate information involving a contract employee at the Kewaunee Nuclear Pov\er Plant.

Attachment:

as stated cc w/atch. B. Berson, Rill P. Louden, Rill J. Creed, Rill T. Madeda, Rill J. Luehman, OE J. Dixon-Herrity, OE J. Longo, OGC R. Paul, OI:RIII M. K. Fahey, 01 G. West, NSIR OE:EA CONTACT: Charles H. Weil (630 810-4372 NOT FOR PUBI C RELEASE WITHOUT THE A %ROVAL OF THE DIRE OR, OFFICE OF ENFORCEM T Information in this record was deleted in accordance wit1tthe Freedom of )'forratoi0 OArL Act, exemRtions ... .

BEFORE THE UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION IN RE THE MATTER OF: )

Pre-Decisional Enforcement Conference ) CONFIDENTIAL Nuclear Management Company, LLC, )

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION HEARING July 16, 2003 9:00 o'clock A.M.

PROCEEDINGS HAD and testimony taken before the UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION, taken at the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Region III, 801 Warrenville Road, Lisle, Illinois, before Jeffrey D.

Stupak, .C.S.R. No. 084-004188, a Notary Public qualified and commissioned for the State of Illinois.

PRESENT FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION:

MS. CYNTHIA PEDERSON, Director, Division of Reactor Safety; MR. JIM DYER, Regional Administrator; MR. CHARLES WEIL, Enforcement/Investigation Coordination Staff; MR. BRUCE BERSON, Regional Counsel; MR. JAMES CREED, Safeguards Program Manager; MS. JENNIFER DIXON-HERRITY, Enforcement Specialist, Office of Enforcement; MS. MARY KAY FAHEY, Investigator;

  • JCcR 1h County Court Reporters, Inc.

County View Centr, Suits 200 600 South County Ydrm Road Oak Brook Office Wheton. lUina 60187 Zanie County Office (630) 654-1121 (630) 6331622 - FAX (630) 653-4139 (630) 897.8852

2 1 PRESENT FOR THE NRC: (Continued) 2 MS. GIOVANNA LONGO; Investigator; 3 MR. PATRICK LOUDEN, Branch Chief, Reactor Projects Branch 5.

4 MR. TERRY MADEDA, Physical Security 5 Inspector; 6 MR; GARMON WEST, Security Specialist; 7

8 PRESENT FOR NUCLEAR MANAGEMENT COMPANY, LLC:

9 10 MR. THOMAS COUTU, Site Vice President, Kewaunee Nuclear Power Plant; 11 MR. JONATHAN ROGOFF, Vice President and 12 Counsel, NMC; 13 MR. GORDON ARENT, Manager Regulatory Affairs, Kewaunee Nuclear Power Plant; 14 MR. ALDO CAPRISTO, Manager, Employee 15 Concerns, NMC; 16 MR. RANDALL CLEVELAND, Manager, Access Authorization and FFD, NMC; 17 MR. DAN CRAFT, Investigator, NMC; 18 MR. GARY VAN MIDDLESWORTH, vice president, 19 NMC; 20 MR. HAL WALKER, Consultant; 21 MR. EDWARD WEINKAM, director of regulatory services.

22 COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

3 1 MS. PEDERSON: Good morning, I'm Cindy Pedersen, 2 I'm the director of the Division of Reactor Safety 3 here in Region III. This meeting is a predecisional 4 enforcement conference with the Nuclear Regulatory 5 Commission and Nuclear Management Company. It does 6 pertain to apparent violations concerning 7 deliberately failing to execute the fitness for duty 8 program and provide complete and accurate information 9 at the Kewaunee facility. This meeting is closed to 10 public observation, but as-our policy we are 11 transcribing this because it does deal with 12 potentially willful violations; therefore, I would 13 ask that you all use the microphone, that it will be 14 on if the little green light is on, and ask that you 15 speak loudly so the transcriptionist is able to fully 16 hear everything, as well as those participants on our 17 video conference. In a few minutes I'll talk about 18 today's agenda, but I'd like to start with 19 introductions, first for the NRC and then Nuclear 20 Management Company.

21 Jim?

22 MR. DYER: I'm Jim Dyer, Regional Administrator, COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

1 Region III.

2 MR. BERSON: Bruce Berson, Regional Counsel.

3 MR. LOUDEN: I'm Pat Louden, DRP Branch ChiE 4 Region III.

5 MR. WEIL: Charles Weil, Enforcement Special 6 Region III.

7 MS. DIXON-HERRITY: Jennifer Dixon-Herrity, 8 with the Office of Enforcement, Headquarters.

9 MR. MADEDA: Terry Madeda, Region III Kewaun 10 Security Inspector.

11 MR. CREED: Jim creed, Region III, Safeguard 12 Program Manager.

13 MS. PEDERSON: NRC observers, please?

14 MR. NEURAUTER: I'm Jim Neurauter, Region II 15 MR. PERGANDE: Shaun Pergande, engineering 16 group.

17 MS. BOND: Jamie Bond, nuclear safety inspec 18 MS. MELENDEZ: Danada Melendez.

19 MR. PAUL: Rich Paul, 01.

20 MS. FUNK: Dawn Funk, physical security 21 inspector.

22 MS. PEDERSON: And headquarters, please?

COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

5 1 MS. LONGO: Giovanna Longo, Office of General 2 Counsel.

3 MS. FAHEY: Mary Kay Fahey, Office of 4 Investigations.

5 MR. SUPUNSIS: NSIR.

6 MR. WEST: 'Garmon West, NSIR.

7 MS. LONGO: This is Ginny Longo. We don't see 8 you on the camera through your end. Is that 9 purposeful, or are you not aware of that?

10 MS. PEDERSON: We are taking care of that.

11 Thank you, Ginny.

12 MS. LONGO: Thanks.

13 MR. LOUDEN: How's that?

14 MS. LONGO: Thank you very much.

15 MS. PEDERSON: For NMC, please?

16 MR. ROGOFF: I'm Jonathan Rogoff, NMC in-house 17 counsel.

18 MR. COUTU: Tom Coutu, Kewaunee Nuclear Plant, 19 site vice president.

20 MR. CLEVELAND: Randy Cleveland, NMC access 21 manager.

22 MR. CAPRISTO: Aldo Capristo, fleet employee COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

USNRC REGION III ORMA 5302101U10 OB/2S/2005 12 :22 6

1 concern program manager.

2 MR. WALKER: Hal Walker, I'm an investigative 3 consultant.

4 MR. PICKENS: Terry Pickens, director of 5 government affairs, NMC, Hudson.

6 ARENT: Gordon Arent, regulatory affairs

-~ -MR.

~i manager,* Kewaunee.

8 MR. WEINKAM: Edward Weinkam, director of 9 regulatory services.

10 MR. VAN MIDDLESWORTH: Gary VanMiddlesworth, 11 vice president, assessments, for NMC.

12 MR. CRAFT: Dan Craft, with Nuclear Management 13 Company. -*

14 MS. PEDERSON: Thank you. I 15 The purpose of today's meeting is to 16 gather additional information for us to make our 17 enforcement decision. As the title implies, 18 "predecisional enforcement conference" means we have 19 not yet made that decision. It's very important I

20 today that we fully understand your perspective of 21 the facts of the case and any additional thoughts you 22 may have about enforcement.

COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 4

1 Briefly I will go over the agenda.

2 After I have concluded my opening remarks, Chuck Weil 3 will briefly discuss the enforcement policy. We are 4 operating under a traditional enforcement policy in 5 this regard.

6 7

8 9

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

8 I Somewhat unique in this particular 2 case is in our-June 9th letter we also specifically 3 asked that you address any potential chilling effect 4 at other NMC facilities since some of the individuals 5 in Kewaunee that were involved in the fitness for 6 duty issue were denied access at Point Beach.

7 Finally, I encourage you and your 8 staff to present anything else that you feel is 9 relevant to our decision.

10 I am sure you've probably had an 11 opportunity to review the enforcement policy again; 1.2 as such, anything that may factor into decisions on 13 civil penalties, if any, we would also like to hear 14 your perspective.

15 Following your presentation and any 16 questions that we may have, we will take a short 17 break. When we reconvene we may have a few 18 follow-along questions. Following that, Chuck Weil 19 will summarize where we go next as far as the formal 20 process is concerned. And lastly, Jim Dyer will 21 provide closing remarks.

22 I will note that we will be making no COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

1 final decisions during this meeting, so we will r 2 be presenting anything of that nature.

3 Before we continue, I'd like to ju 4 comment on what the significance of what we're he 5 to discuss today. As you know, the NRC considers 6 potential deliberate violations very seriously.

7 addition to the potential of this case of having 8 unfit individual on site, the potential here is t 9 a supervisor deliberately failed to take action a 10 then later potentially lied about his knowledge.

11 And, obviously, that is not acceptable. Our 12 regulatory framework relies on individuals to con 13 with our requirements in a trustworthy manner. I 14 somebody violates that trust it does shake the 15 foundation of our regulatory framework and cannot 16 tolerated.

17 With that, John or Tom, any openin 18 remarks you would like to make?

19 MR. COUTU: I do have some opening remarks 20 before we begin the presentation, but let me begi 21 with the fact that we at Kewaunee and NMC take 22 fitness for duty, access authorization, employee COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

1 concerns and safety conscious work environment v(

2 seriously.

3 This has been a long and difficult 4 investigation. We still, coming into this 5 conference, are not clear on the exact nature of 6 violations, so we will present to you a purpose, 7 we believe is the purpose for our meeting today 8 then our objectives. As I have said this has beE 9 difficult issue for us to pin down. There are --

10 there's very little in the way of hard facts. Mc 11 of the information that we have has been the resv 12 of interviews with numerous people. Conflicting 13 statements have been made. We have had very much 14 a lot of difficulty corroborating statements that 15 individuals have made. So, were we forced to dra 16 conclusions based on what we believed to be the w 17 reasonable sequence of events that occurred and %

18 intend to show that to you today, how we came to 19 conclusions we did based on the information that 20 had..

21 We hope that this can be a very op 22 exchange of information. Our goal here is really COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

1 get to the right conclusion and not to defend onE 2 position or another. So if the NRC is in possesE 3 of information that we do not have, we hope to ol 4 that information today. And if our course of act 5 need to be changed, we will in fact change our cc 6 of actions.

7. So with that, I'd like to just, if 8 nobody has any questions, move into the presentat 9 MS. PEDERSON: Okay.

10 MR. COUTU: Oh, also, this can get complicat 11 from a names and positions perspective, so if you 12 would, we've prepared just a little chart of who' 13 who as far as folks that were involved initially 14 the concerns and folks that we talked to and feel 15 that we will be speaking about today in our 16 presentation.

17 MS. PEDERSON: What I would suggest is that 18 NRC participants return this document to you sinc 19 would be personal privacy information and I would 20 that we return it to you at the end of the meetin 21 MR. COUTU: All right. It's going to be tou 22 to keep track of everything for anybody who hasn' COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

12 1 been very familiar with this.

2 MS. PEDERSON: I appreciate that.

3 MR. COUTU: Okay.

4 Gordon?

5 MR. ROGOFF: Before Tom begins, it's going to be 6 very difficult to talk about this without speaking 7 the names of some of these individuals so, I mean, I 8 think we --

9 MS. PEDERSON: Right. My only point of that is 10 it being a document submitted to the agency, you 11 know, as part of this. But you're right, we will 12 that's why it's closed. We will be talking personal 13 privacy and potential willful.

14 MR. COUTU: Okay.

15 So, first off I will cover the purpose 16 of -- what we believe to be the purpose of this 17 enforcement conference, our objectives. And I will 18 also cover at a very high level the results of our 19 investigation. I would ask that, unless there's a 20 real burning question at that point, to kind of wait 21 on questions until Mr. Randy Cleveland makes his 22 presentation on the details of the investigation.

COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

13 1 MS. LONGO: This is Ginny Longo. I have to 2 interrupt you, I'm sorry, just to ask. You all were 3 going to fax something, it hasn't come. Is there a 4 problem? I understand part of your presentation is 5 writing and we were going to be faxed a copy; is that 6 correct?

7 MR. MADEDA: The fax should be on its way.

8 MS. LONGO: Okay.

9 MR. MADEDA: Yeah, there should be a second fax 10 also coming.

11 MS. LONGO: Thank you. Sorry.

12 MR. COUTU: So, Mr. Cleveland will present the 13 investigation details and then Mr. Aldo Capristo will 14 present the potential effect or lack of potential 15 effect on safety conscious work environment. During 16 the course of the investigation, we did discover some 17 things that we did act upon. We will be covering 18 those actions, and Mr. Cleveland and Mr. Capristo 19 will in fact lay those out for you. And then I will 20 come back and wrap things up.

21 Our purpose today, we believe it is to 22 provide the NRC with facts that NMC investigations COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

14 1 revealed regarding allegation one, which was that 2 welders deliberately followed the -- failed to report 3 fitness for duty concerns; and a contract mechanical 4 and civil superintendent, that would be'4; 5 failed to report a fitness for duty concern involving 6 a foreman, and that would be a Day & Zimmerman 7 foreman, contract foreman, that would be*.

8 or your chart; to provide the NRC with 9 facts that NMC's investigations revealed regarding 10 allegation three, which is that a rontract mechanical 13 and civil superintendent again provided 12 false information to the NMC investigator relative to 13 being informed about the fitness for duty concern 14 involving :he LL11JAWAiV>fi95>

foreman, also,.)%J to 15 provide, the NRC insight from the NMC's evaluation of 16 potential for chilling effects as a result of the 17 actions taken during our investigations and to 18 provide our conclusion concerning potential 19 violations.

20 Our objectives today are to show that 21 the NMC investigation was thorough and that our 22 conclusions were based on the facts, and probably COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

15 1 more correctly based on reasonable judgment 2 surrounding the information that we gained through 3 the interview process and several other fact-finding 4 initiatives that we identified; to demonstrate how we 5 carried out our fitness for duty obligations based on 6 the information *that he has obtained during the two 7 related investigations; and to explain how NMC 8 maintained a safety conscious work environment 9 throughout the course of the investigation and 10 afterwards and how we managed that.

11 At a high level, the results of the 12 investigation, and then I'll go over what the 13 original allegation was that was brought to our 14 attention that launched into the investigation, and 15 that was that a Day & Zimmerman NPS supervisor turned 16 their heads when certain individuals come in half 17 blitzed. That was the original allegation.

18 Due to the potential seriousness of 19 the issue, wetretained the counsel of an independent 20 investigator, actually the services of an independent 21 investigator, iWalker Consultants, and that's Mr. Hal 22 Walker at theiend of the table (indicating), he was COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.-

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

16 1 retained to complete a comprehensive investigation of 2 this incident.

3 Our investigative efforts and 4 conclusions were summarized and reported to the NRC 5 in a letter dated February 8 of 2002. There were 6 basically two investigations. We had an initial 7 investigation and then a supplemental investigation, 8 and we'll go through the results of those.

9 The initial investigation identified 10 four individuals who stated that on occasion they 11 perceived the odor of alcohol on the breath of a Day 12 & Zimmerman foreman, that would be' 13 while inside the Kewaunee protected area. None of 14 the individuals notified their immediate supervisor 15 or other member of management at the time that they 16 detected the odor of alcohol. That is the finding of 17 our investigation.

18 All four individuals who detected the 19 odor of alcohol on the breath of the Day & Zimmerman 7

20 forema' -1ere aware of their responsibilities to 21 report or act.

22 And as a result, during of course of COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

1 our investigation we uncovered some trustworthinE 2 and reliability issues that led us to deny access 3 because the individuals did not report the odor c 4 alcohol when they detected it. They basically fE 5 to support our fitness for duty policy and reallj 6 gave us no indication that they would support thE 7 fitness for duty policy.

8 A supplementary investigation was 9 undertaken following communication by a concerned 10 individual to our, to NMC employee concerns progi 11 That individual wished to provide us additional 12 information or observations relative to the initi 13 investigation, so we opened a supplemental 14 investigation to follow up on those. This concer 15 individual provided two new elements of concern.

16 was related to the fitness for duty issue. The o 17 element was related to welding issues and that ha 18 two parts. We investigated, we thoroughly 19 investigated the two elements and neither of the 20 elements are substantiated.

21 What we did find on the initial 22 allegation, as a result of both investigations, i COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

18 1 that the concern was partially substantiated. it 2 could not be concluded that the Day & Zimmerman 3 foreman was ever on the job unfit for duty. We were 4 unable to conclude that. It was concluded that the 5 odor of alcohol was detected. And, in fact, it was 6 concluded that the Day & Zimmerman superintendenA 7 failed to comply with our fitness for duty program by 8 not ordering a for-cause test upon the detection of 9 an odor of alcohol. And although he performed 10 additional behavioral observations to ascertain 11 fitness for duty, he did not act in accordance with 12 our fitness for duty policy which does require 13 for-cause testing. It was also not substantiated 14 that any welder reported, initially reported the odor 15 of alcohol to the immediate supervisor or any member 16 of management.

17 So, again, we do not'substantiate the 18 allegation that the odor of alcohol had been reported 19 to the contract mechanical and civil superintendent, 20 We did not conclude that the' contract 21 mechanical and-civil superintendent provided 22 incomplete or inaccurate information. We do not COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

19 1 believe that a chilling effect had been created at an 2 NMC facility as a result of this FFD issue or actions 3 that NMC has taken in response to what we discovered 4 in the course of our investigations. And we do not 5 believe at this time that any findings support 6 escalated enforcement.

7 And with that, I'd like to turn it 8 over to Mr. Randy Cleveland to provide additional 9 detail on what we discovered through the course of 10 our investigations.

11 MR. CLEVELAND: Okay, I'm going to highlight the 12 NMC investigative findings supporting our conclusion 13 that the superintendent, -wasnot 14 informed of anlcohol ofO on 15 Our investigation focused on five 16 welders, each reporting that they detected the odor 17 of alcohol on, and whether they reported 18 the odor of alcohol to the superintendent,

19. Our investigation concluded that four of 20 the welders deliberately failed to report the odor of 21 alcohol. This conclusion is based on two primary 22 findings: One, that the welders were adequately COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

20 1 trained on the expectation to report FFD concerns; 2 and the second, they provided specific reasons for 3 not reporting the odor of alcohol to supervision.

4 And, particularly, that these reasons were provided 5 prior to their notice by us of denial of access.

6 The welders, I'll begin with 7 again provided specific reasons. He asked the 8 investigator, Hal Walker, to look at things from his 9 point of view, that as a 10 11 12 you didn't want to, as he stated, "Create 13 waves. You kept your eyes open and your mouth shut."

14 That was the reason that gave for not going 15 forward with the odor of alcohol to supervision.

16 simply stated it was not his 17 job to sniff others.

18 J Istated that supervision was 19 aware of drinking habits; therefore, 20 there was no reason to report. And he was a fellow 21 worker.

22 Finally,. simply stated he COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

21 1 feared union reprisal as the basis for not reporting 2 the odor of alcohol to

3. The tifth welder having reported the 4 detection of alcohol ultimately 5 found to be not credible. This was based on our 6 finding of contradictory statements, uncorroborated 7 claims and a threat that the individual made to 8 which we will detail a little further in the 9 presentation.

10 Regarding the first area of concern, 11 with this is the fifth welder's 12 credibility --

13 MR. COUTU: Let me make sure you understand.

14 We're going to focus on the fifth welder because he 15 was the only individual who told us that he reported.

16 *The other individuals clearly told us they did not 17 report. So we are going to spend some time on this 18 individual because we wanted to be sure that we 19 understood whether or not he in fact did or did not 20 report. And that's really important.

21 MR. CLEVELAND: The first area of concern with 22 j redibility involved contradictory COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

22 1 statements he made to NMC investigators. The first 2 example includes a statement that he made on January 3 11, 2002, stating that ýhe foreman,  !-

4 was loaded every morning, and in a subsequent 5 interview with NMC security on March 27 he made the

.6 statement that he didn't know anything about the 7 foreman being drunk.

8 The second example involves a random 9 testing situation wherein, again on/ nuary 11, 202 10 claims that he was escorted to the 11 collections site at Kewaunee for a random test bye.

12 On March 27 of 2002, in a subsequent 13 interview again with NMC security, he this time 14 denies being escorted to the collection site by the 15 foreman, j 16 Our third example of a contradictory 17 statement concerns, again, a random collection 18 wherein alleges that the collector 19 performing the random drug and alcohol test 20 acknowledged the escort,,S and again 21 these statements were made on January 11, 2002 as "a 22 little ripe." This was in response toj3 COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

23 1 challenging the collector as to why she was not 2 testing the messenger, the escort, ......

3 In an interview with NMC security on 4 June 12 of 2002, again reiterates that 5 j-as not at the collection site and this 6 time that when he challenged the collector regarding 7 why she wasn't testing the messenger, she appeared 8 puzzled and did not in fact make such a statement, 9 appeared "a little ripe."

10 The second area of concern with 11 respect to credibility involved 12 uncorroborated claims. We've got.three examples here 13 which I would like to detail.

14".. The first one involved 15 claim that che foremaniand a co-worker,=

16' went through access control together and that one 17 hour later the co-worker, ]was for-cause 18 tested. Our review of test records from- we 19 were only able to identify a random test in y 2001 20 time frame. There was no record at all of a 21 for-cause test conducted o 22 The second uncorroborated claim ties COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

24 1 back to the previous contradictory point we covered 2 wherein Q*M . -6 "claims the collector acknowledged 3 thelforeman s not fit for duty. This 4 is getting back to the "a little ripe" statement.

5 Again ]claimed he was escorted by Mr.

6 Lto the collection site, that he challenged 7 the collector as to why she wasn't testing the 8 messenger, and the messenger acknowledged, yeah, he's 9 "a little ripe."

10 We interviewed both of the collectors 11 that performed random tests on in y of 12 102 2001and neither of the collectors could recal26 13 escorting. to the collection 14 site, making any such statements regarding 15 why they weren't testing the messenger, and neither 16 had any reason to ever question 17 fitness for duty.

18 The third example involves a document 19 that. provided to us on June 12, of twice-20 removed hearsay, essentially a he-said-that-he-said-21 that-he-said. The document alleging that the 22 superintendent, admitted to receiving COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

25 1 reports of the odor of alcohol and lying to 2 investigators.

3 Our follow up on this, we immediately 4 re-interviewed Background on 5 what the document detailed, it detailed a 6 conversation betwee and in which 7 *admits

-,* t40 011`t hat aand Qlhad reported to him the smell of alcohol on 9 and that ;lied to NMC 10 investigators regarding the same. Our interview of ii ind found both denied the 12 truthfulness of the document and neither acknowledged 13 that the statement regarding anyone reporting the 14 odor of alcohol to- -was made.

15 The third area of concern regarding 16 *cebility cre** involves a statement he 17 made to the superintendent in June of 18 2001. This was developed by Mr. Dan Craft of my 19 staff. Dan Craft was recently hired by us, he's got 20 31 years of experience with the Federal Bureau of 21 Investigation, he was a special agent and supervisor 22 in character of investigations. We commissioned Dan COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

26 1 to take a look at, in preparation for the enforcement 2 conference here, the entire investigation that was 3 done, all that was conducted by Hal Walker and any 4 subsequent investigations that we conducted to 5 determine whether it was comprehensive and complete 6 and whether we needed to do additional investigation.

7 One of the things that Dan found, he identified the 8 need to go back and take a look at the employee file 9 01f We did that and that's where we 10 developed the statements made to the superintendent.

12 Dan also did some re-interviewing and some additional 12 interviews and we are -- that information is 13 available.

14 What Dan found in the employee file of is evidence of a statement that he made 16 in June of 2001. had gone toQi 17 concerned that he should have been setup as the 18 foreman on the job. He opinioned that the foreman, 19 is an idiot; asserted, this i 20 asserted that he is not going to burn rod 21 for the rest of his li-fe; and finally, he threatened 22 to "get even and when I do, you people won't know COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

27 what hit you." This was documented to . . .

2 file on June 26th of 2001.

3 MR. BERSON: Could you explain how that 4 information got inton, Ile?

5 reported it?

6 MR. CLEVELAND: It was iicM" U employee 7 file. It was a signed note of a memorandum of 8 meeting that took place by -- betweenad 9 signed by 10 MR. BERSON: Okay.

11 MR. COUTU: I think it's important here to note

" 12 that, No. 1, we were not directed by anyone to go 13 look at this file. It wasn't like_ said, 14 "go check his file." This was an independent piece.

15 I think the second piece, that's 16 important to understand is the time frame in which 17 this was entered, which was before, really, any of 18 these allegations were claimed to have been made, 19 which was in June 2001 time frame, as opposed to 20 starting in July. This whole issue started in the 21 July 2001 time frame. So I think those are important 22 things to understand about time frame and the fact COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

28

'J 1 that no one directed us to go look for this. It just 2 turned up in our investigation. We would have 3 probably treated it differently ifihad said, 4 "Well, go look in his file. There's something 5 there." It's a great question and, you know, we 6 considered that.

7 MR. BERSON: When di ign this 8 statement?

9 MR. CLEVELAND: June 26, 2001.

  • 10 MR. BERSON: He signed it prior to, okay.

MR. CLEVELAND: Correct.

12 So, in summary, with respect to the 13 fifth welder, we ultimately concluded 14 him to be not credible based on the reasons which I 15 just articulated and were ultimately unable to 16 substantiate his claim that he had reported the odor 17 of alcohol t 18 In conclusion, NMC was unable to 19 substantiate that the welders had reported the odor 20 of alcohol to Again, this was based on 21 our finding that the four welders, again prior to 22 their denial of access, stated that they did not COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

29 1 provide that information to supervision, specifically 2 the odor of alcohol on R For the one 3 that did claim that he had reported the odor of 4 alcohol to we spent a great deal of time 5 here detailing our investigative efforts to 6 corroborate his claim and were unable, ultimately 7 unable to do so based on our finding it was not 8 credible, and our inability to substantiate his 9 claims.

10 MR. COUTU: I'd like to ask Mr. Aldo Capristo to 11 talk a little bit about the issue that you asked us 12 to address which was potential impacts on a chilled 13 work environment as a result of the actions taken 14 during this investigation.

15 MR. CAPRISTO: Good morning. As .I mentioned in 16 my introduction, I am currently the fleet employee 17 concern program manager, and I think relevant to this 18 is at the time these events unfolded I was also 19 serving in the capacity as employee concern program 20 manager for the Kewaunee facility, so I was 21 integrally involved in these issues as they unfolded.

22 I have two central points. First, COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

30 1 that NMC self-identified the potential for a chilling 2 effect within the Day & Zimmerman organization and we 3 took action to address the safety conscious work 4 environment throughout this period.

5 Second, I will explain our basis for 6 our conclusion that the Kewaunee fitness for duty 7 issue did not create a chilling effect at Kewaunee or 8 other facilities.

9 MR. COUTU: That is a typo, should be "did not."

10 MR. CAPRISTO: "Did not create" on the handout.

11 I think that's substantial. Make sure to put that in 12 your notes.

13 We based these conclusions on three 14 specific evaluations that are relevant to the time 15 period. First, a fleet life safety cultural 16 assessment that was conducted in September 2001 which 17 is directly in the period of time of interest.

18 Second, a more specific concerns environmental 19 assessment that was conducted within the Day &

20 Zimmerman working group within the Point Beach and 21 Kewaunee organization.

22 And I think at this point it's COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

1 relevant to mention, again, it's important to 2 understand that this is a migrating working grour 3 that these are not regular employees that support 4 and only one facility. That as the work at KewaL 5 rolled up with the generator replacement project 6 *the fall of 2001, some of these employees then mc 7 over to Point Beach. I believe that's the basis 8 your concern that this may have had an impact bey 9 just Kewaunee. So these employees do migrate bet 10 facilities.

11 And third and final is an evaluati 12 that we provided in response to a previous NRC 13 request on this topic.

14 MR. WEIL: Could you explain to us how a 15 September 2001 assessment has to do with people t 16 are denied access in, seemingly, December some th 17 months later? I don't understand its relevance.

18 It's beforehand.

19 MR. CAPRISTO: I think there's a -- as we 20 understand the issue, the issue was brought to ou 21 attention in November that there was a potential 22 fitness for duty issue, that there was an COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

32 1 unwillingness to report, whether it was an unfit 2 person at the facility. My understanding was that 3 this could have existed in this prior time and I 4 believe we go back to the July 2001 time frame where 5 there were concerns ultimately unearthed there could 6 have been unfit employees, that 7 specifically may have been unfit as early as July 8 2001.

9 MR. WEIL: Let me be a little more explicit. I 10 think the potential chilling effect question we are II asking is, ,after these gentlemen.raised the issue of 12 the fitness for duty issue and I believe circa 13 December, maybe, 2001, to potentially January 2002, 14 pulling this off the top of my head.

15 MR. COUTU: It was around the November time 16 frame.

17 MR. WEIL-: So, well my point is it was after 18 this assessment so I don't understand the relevance 19 of the assessment period which was before they raised 20 the issue. We're asking the question, they raised 21 the issue and the chilling effect, if there was any, 22 would be afterwards, not beforehand.

COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.-

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

33 1 MR. CAPRISTO: I think as I speak to the next 2 line --

3 MR. WEIL: Okay, well go ahead then. Maybe 4 we'll have to come back to the question.

5 MR. CAPRISTO: Certainly.

6 On that next line, again speaking to 7 the fleet-wide safety cultural assessment as an 8 effort to benchmark our entire fleet, we commissioned 9 an independent review by an expert in this area, 10 Synergy Consulting Services. Synergy's survey 11 instrument provides opportunities to demographically 12 identify the working group. It does not identify you 13 by name, but identifies you as a working group. In 14 the September 2001 survey, the demographically 15 important group is known as "CL" or contract labor.

16 And in that particular work group, again in the 17 September 2001 time frame, what we identified through 18 the Synergy report was that the working environment, 19 the safety culture and nuclear safety in general was 20 rated in the category of "good" to "very good." Now, 21 again, it's important to understand a few things. We 22 don't know that these -- that any.of the principals COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

1 in this survey specifically responded to this su3 2 but to the extent that we can demographically isc 3 a working group to contract labor, which would bE 4 representative of this work group, that is the rE 5 that we were provided by the consultant. Now.,

6 potentially speaking more directly to your point, 7 conducted a follow-up survey earlier this year ar 8 the same working grouping identified little to nc 9 change in that surveyed area.

10 MS. LONGO: Excuse me, I have a question. 'y 11 identified that the result of your survey was a-c 12 to very good response for contract labor. What d 13 categories exist? Excellent, superior, awful, 14 average?

15 MR. CAPRISTO: I don't have those committed 16 memory, ma'am, but there are more positive and le 17 positive responses. I believe we get all the way 18 down to the range of unacceptable. I would confi 19 that though.

20 MS. LONGO: Okay. But there are more positi 21 responses than "good" to "very good."

22 MR. CAPRISTO: That is correct.

COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

35 1 MS. LONGO: Thank you.

2 MR. COUTU: Before we leave this line, I would 3 like to address your question very directly.

4 MR. WEIL: Sure.

5 MR. COUTU: If you think about a chilled work 6 environment and you think about individuals who can 7 claim to have reported the issues to their 8 supervision over the course of a period all the way 19 back to the July time frame and those concerns not 10 being addressed, I believe that survey conducted in 11 September is very important to understanding what 12 type of work environment existed as a result of 13 individuals feeling free to report concerns to their 14 supervision and having those concerns acted upon. Sc 15 there is a period of time between July and September 16 where these involved individuals experienced a work 17 environment and then in September had an opportunity 18 to, through the cultural survey, to do that. That 19 provided us our baseline. So it's really important 20 to understand we're talking about the issue of what 21 was the work environment before, and during, and then 22 also what was it after we took our actions? And that COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

1 kind of ties everything together because it's 2 important because chilling goes way beyond just t 3 actions that we took, it goes to the fact that 4 supervisors allegedly failed to act on concerns.

5 MR. WEIL: Your point is well taken. I'm mc 6 interested in, of course, in anything after the f 7 to rule out, you know, that there was a chilling 8 effect because of maybe any potential retaliation 9 perceived retaliation, whatever it may be. That' 10 what we are most interested in.

11 MR. COUTU: And we understand that.

12 MR. CAPRISTO: And I think that as I continu 13 think we get more focused and on point to this 14 working group as I continue.

15 MS. PEDERSON: If I could, before you go on, 16 you have a recollection of what kind of response 17 you got on your labor force? Was it a small 18 percentage of people responded to this survey suc 19 that it was not necessarily representative of the 20 group as a whole?

21 MR. CAPRISTO: The consultant provides us wi 22 the response rate both overall and within the wor, COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

1 group. I think most directly to your point, the 2 consultant also provide us, with, if you will, an 3 asterisk that identifies when the response rate is 4 less than sufficient to assign any statistical 5 significance and this work group did not meet that 6 trigger. In reverse, yes, it was a statistically 7 significant sample based on the population.

8 MS..DIXON-HERRITY: Was the outage over at this 9 point? Were the people that you were taiking to 10 during your cultural survey, were these the same ones 11 there during the outage and in July?

12 MR. CAPRISTO: The September 2001 survey would 13 have been at the time that the steam generator 14 replacement outage was staffing and beginning.

15 MS. DIXON-HERRITY: Okay.

16 MR. CAPRISTO: And I think I spoke to this third 17 point, is that the follow-up assessment that we took 18- in January 2003, again with the same demographics, 19 did not identify any significant -- statistically 20 significant change. Again though, I must note that 21 this may or may not have been the same employees.

22 This is, again, a migrating work group and it's some COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

38 1 period of time later.

2 More directly within the Day &

3 Zimmerman working group, in isolation of this fitness 4 for duty issue, there were many other indicators to 5 us that there were potential barriers, to problem 6 reporting within the Day & Zimmerman organization.

7 We took action as licensee with Day & Zimmerman 8 management to direct them to better understand their 9 overall working environment. And as a result of our 10 direction to Day & Zimmerman management, Day &

11 Zimmerman commissioned an independent consultant, Dr.

12 Michael Quinn of Management Systems, to interview and 13 understand the entire working environment and outline 14 for us any potential barriers to problem reporting 15 within this working group.

16 Dr. Quinn reported to us and to Day &

17 Zimmerman in a report dated January 31, 2002, and his 18 fieldwork was conducted primarily in November and 19 December of 2001, so, again, I think it-speaks 20 directly to the environment at that time.

21 It's important to understand again 22 though, going back to the migrating work group idea, COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

1 that the Day & Zimmerman work force at this point was 2 primarily at Point Beach, so the majority of folks 3 that Dr. Quinn worked with were in the Point Beach 4 organization at that time.

5 What we identified was that there were 6 in fact barriers to problem reporting within this 7 working group but that they primarily manifested 8 themselves for what we would call "craft labor 9 culture.". And I think any of us that have managed 10 not only a union work\force but also a craft labor 11 work force can understand the complexities and the 12 issues that are sometimes unique to managing such a 13 work force. This is not a unique issue to Nuclear

14. Management Company. But most importantly, again 15 through the interview process and through the 16 entirety of Dr. Quinn's work, he did not identify any 17 barriers that related in any way to the Kewaunee 18 fitness for duty issue. And those issues that he did 19 identify, NMC did take action on which we will 20 outline later.

21 Finally, NRC had previously asked us 22 to look at this issue and in our response in a COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

40 1 February 8, 2002 letter to NRC, NMC has provided the 2 results of yet another review of the safety conscious 3 work environment within Day & Zimmerman. This time, 4 our methodology was slightly different. We utilized 5 the services of a member of my staff, Mike Langley, 6 employee concern program manager, came to Point Beach 7 and Kewaunee and interviewed members of the Day &

8 Zimmerman staff and asked them what potential 9 barriers there might be to problem reporting and whether or not there was a willingness to problem 11 report.

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

41 1 see the fact that there were barriers to problem 2 reporting within the organization, which goes all the 3 way back to our -- some of our initial slides which 4 said that people chose or appeared to rationalize why 5 they did not have to comply with the fitness for duty 6 policy when they are required to. report the odor of 7 alcohol on another individual. So, that appeared to 8 us, and from our studies, and from our 9 investigations, to be rooted in a different -- in a 10 different cultural aspect of the labor work force, 11 and as a result, not as a.result necessarily of our 12 investigations, investigation-related, although some 13 of this is, but as a result of our investigations 14 into the culture of the work force we took some 15 actions to bolster that culture. And I'm going to 16 ask Mr. Cleveland and Mr. Capristo to address those 17 actions. Although they were not directly related, 18 all of them were not directly related to this, we 19 recognize that these were important to bring in here 20 because we knew that a certain culture existed in the 21 work force and we really can't tolerate that culture 22 continuing if we're going to-operate the plant COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

42 1 safely.

2 MS. PEDERSON: Can I ask you a question before 3 you get into your actions?

4 You focused a lot on Day & Zimmerman.

5 Did you have similar kinds of responses or barriers 6 identified in other work groups?

7 MR. CAPRISTO: I would say to a lesser extent, 8 yes. But the -- our primary focus and the primary 9 activity of those drivers that brought us to the 10 conclusion that we needed to work with Day &

11 Zimmerman was primarily volume to the employee 12 concern program. So we had a, if you will, a 13 continuing stream of input that indicated to us that 14 work needed to be done and focused within the Day &

15 Zimmerman organization.

16 MS. PEDERSON: How about other NMC facilities?

17 Again, a lot of focus on Point Beach, Kewaunee, Day &

18 Zimmerman; any other input on other NMC facilities.?

19 MR. CAPRISTO: We have not found -- we have not 20 found to this extent any type of issue at any other 21 NMC facility. Day & Zimmerman, please correct me if 22 I'm wrong, does support our other NMC sites.

COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

43 1 MR. ROGOFF: That's correct.

2 MR. CAPRISTO: But we have not seen those type 3 of issues surface at other NMC facilities.

4 MS. PEDERSON: Now, the survey, you mentioned 5 the Synergy survey, that was for all NMC facilities?

6 MR. CAPRISTO: That's correct.

7 MS. PEDERSON: And if I understand your 8 discussion, your two other reviews that you did, 9 evaluations, were specific to Day & Zimmerman at 10 Kewaunee?

1.1 MR. CAPRISTO: Kewaunee and Point Beach, 12 correct..

13 MS. PEDERSON: Kewaunee and Point Beach, thank 14 you.

15 MR. COUTU: I think another important thing to 16 remember is that at the time Kewaunee and Point Beach 17 were being managed as a three-unit site organization, 18 and so that's kind of an important thing to remember.

19 Our employee concerns were all together at that 20 particular point in time.

21 THE COURT:. Thank you.

22 MR. CAPRISTO: That's correct.

COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

44 1 MR. BERSON: Just kind of a detail. The Synergy 2 study, did it also break down results by facilities 3 as well as across the fleet?

4 MR. CAPRISTO: Yes, it did. I am not certain if 5 we broke Kewaunee and Point Beach out in isolation to 6 each other. I believe at that point it was a 7 three-unit site. But, yes, there are different 8 results at Prairie Island and Duane Arnold and our 9 other NMC facilities.

10 MR. BERSON: But the "good" to "very good" 11 reference from the slide was to overall fleet 12 results?

13 MR. CAPRISTO: That was specific to the Kewaunee 14 and Point Beach environment within Day & Zimmerman, 15 within the contract labor pool.

16 MR. BERSON: Okay. Thanks.

17 MR. COUTU: So, Randy, if you would take us 18 through Some of the corrective actions we made and 19 then Aldo will also address.

20 MR. CLEVELAND: Okay.

21 As Tom has already stated, we did take 22 some actions with respect to access authorization for COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

45 1 those people which we believe made a conscious, 2 deliberate decision to not follow the Kewaunee FFD 3 program and not report the FFD concerns, specifically 4 the odor of alcohol on supervision.

5 We, across the program, went and 6 underscored the importance of the immediate reporting 7 of the odor of alcohol to supervision and the need to 8 act on it. We did that through a number of actions 9 which I will detail here.

10 We have a form that is part of our 11 access authorization program, it's called a "Rights 12 and Responsibilities Statement" that each individual 13 has to sign and is acknowledging they read and 14 understand prior to being granted access on to our 15 sites. Where devised that to underscore the 16 importance of reporting the odor of alcohol 17 immediately to supervision and the consequence for 18 not reporting it which puts your access authorization 19 at risk. That applies fleet-wide to anyone coming 20 into an NMC site would have to complete that form.

21 Another fleet-wide initiative that we 22 undertook was to put out a program reminder. This COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

1 was done through various communication vehicles z 2 the sites, again underscoring the importance of t 3 immediate reporting of the odor of alcohol, and 4 consequence for not doing so, and also addressed 5 general FFD concerns.

6 MS. PEDERSON: If I could go back to your fi 7 item as far as taking action?

8 MR. CLEVELAND: Sure.

9 MS. PEDERSON: Am I correct that three 10 individuals were denied access at Point Beach, ve 11 four?

12 MR. CLEVELAND: Four at Kewaunee.

13 MS. PEDERSON: Okay.

14 MR. CLEVELAND: For the failure to report th 15 reported detection of odor of alcohol to supervis 16 MS. PEDERSON: Okay.

17 And then at Point Beach, several w 18 denied --

19 MR. CLEVELAND: The same four would be denie 20 throughout the NMC fleet.

21 MS. PEDERSON: Okay.

22 MR. CLEVELAND: If you're denied at one site COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

47 1 you're denied at all.

2 MS. PEDERSON: Okay, it was four. Thank you.

3 MR. MADEDA: I have one question. The 4 individuals that you were talking about, are other 5 key players that you interviewed in this, has there 6 been any access authorization issues involving them?

7 MR. CLEVELAND: No.

8 MR. MADEDA: So, you are talking about the four 9 welders.

10 MR. CLEVELAND: We're talking about the ¶ur 11 welders andV 12 MR. MADEDA: Okay.

.13 MR. CLEVELAND: A total of five that we took

14. access authorization on: The u rJhat failed to 15 report and 16 MR. MADEDA: Okay.

17 MS. PEDERSON: Five.

18 MR. CLEVELAND: We denied his access.

19 MR. MADEDA: So, there's been no access 20 authorization action taken against eitherL 21 22 MR. CLEVELAND: Correct.

COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

48 1 MR. MADEDA: Thank you.

2 MR. CLEVELAND:

  • the 3 superintendent -- well, let me just sort of qualify 4 there with respect to you mentioned 5 MR. MADEDA: Yes, sir.

6 MR. CLEVELAND: Right. With respect to time 7 frame, we took no action.

8 MR. MADEDA: Has there been subsequent action?

9 MR. CLEVELAND: Correct. As he -- in a 10 pre-access test in March of this year, he was denied 11 as a result of a positive test.

12 MR. MADEDA: And the positive test was for?

13 MR. CLEVELAND: Alcohol.

14 MR. MADEDA: Thank you.

15 MR.' CLEVELAND: LIwas coached and 16 counseled regarding the zero to erance expectation 17 that NMC has with respect to the odor of alcohol, 18 that even a faint or imperceptible smell needs to be 19 acted on, that that as a stand-alone is a basis for 20 taking action. He had initially indicated to us that 21 he considered the odor faint and imperceptible and 22 did not notice any other signs such as unsteady gait, COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-.1622

49 1 slurred speech, et cetera.

2 We went back and again underscored the 3 importance of immediate reporting of the odor of 4 alcohol through a test questionnaire and general 5 employee-training program, made the same 6 clarifications underscoring the importance of and 7 applying of FFD procedure.

8 MR. CAPRISTO: And then, finally, I would add 9 that, as I stated, what Dr. Quinn's report and what 10 we were well aware of'was that we had what I would 11 most appropriately characterize as labor relations 12 issues between the local labor union hall and the 13 employer, the national employer, Day & Zimmerman. We 14 had had a, at this point, a fairly long history of 15 issues within this working group and this population 16 of workers that periodically supports our site, so we 17 identified the action to go speak with the local 18 labor union leaders, the head steward, and I'm not 19 exactly sure of the titles, at the Green Bay Locals, 20 and speak to them directly on what exactly our 21 expectations are as a nuclear employer and the 22 differences between working and earning your income COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

50 1 at the nuclear facilities in contrast to the 2 remaining period of time when they worked at other 3 non-nuclear facilities. We explained that problem 4 reporting is not only desired, but in fact required 5 as a condition of employment such that people do need 6 to bring forth their issues and will be held 7 accountable if they fail to bring issues forward. We 8 expressed to them, in the most fundamental terms, the 9 differences between nuclear employment an non-nuclear 10 employment. This meeting was held with Day &

11 Zimmerman representatives and Nuclear Management 12 Company employees to express those thoughts and 13 expectations.

14 MR. CREED: What was their response?

15 MR. CAPRISTO: I, generally, I would say 16 understanding, and I believe we left them with a 17 better appreciation for the differences between 18 nuclear and non-nuclear employment. I would -- I'm 19 not sure that I would say that there was any further 20 characterization than a good understanding.

21 MR. BERSON: Can you say again when 22 tested positive?

COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

51 1 MR. CLEVELAND: Pardon?

2 MR. BERSON: Can you state again when 1 3 tested positive?

4 MR. CLEVELAND: On a pre-access test.

5 MR. BERSON: When was that?

6 MR. CLEVELAND: March of this year.

7 MR. BERSON: March of this year.

8 MR. CLEVELAND: 2003.

9 MR. MADEDA: Regarding that pre-access test, 10 would it be the licensee's policy to have an 11 out-briefing of that individual to present that 12 individual's side?

13 MR. CLEVELAND: No, we -- on a pre-access test 14 such as that, it's an automatic denial for a minimal 15 period of one year.

16 MR. MADEDA: Dift *--provide any 17 comments to any of your staff, either at the site or 18 corporate, regarding the positive test results?

19 MR. CLEVELAND: That I would have to research, 20 Terry. I do not have that readily available.

21 MR. MADEDA: Thank you.

22 MR. COUTU: So, in summary, our investigations COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

52 1 did not substantiate the allegation that the odor of 2 alcohol had in fact been reported to the contract 3 mechanical and civil superintendent,,

4 Also, that NMC did not conclude, based on the information that we obtained in our 6 investigations tha i rovided incomplete 7 or inaccurate information.

8 We also concluded that a chilling 9 effect has not been created at NMC facilities as a 10 result of this fitness foi duty issues and we do not ii believe that, although there were violations of our 12 fitness for duty policy, clearly they were on the 13 part of &the general mechanical 14 superintendent, and certain individuals in. the work 15 force; we do not believe that those support escalated 16 enforcement.

17 MS. PEDERSON: Thank you.

18 At this time, I'd like to ask if there 19 are any of the NRC representatives that have 20 questions of NMC. Should we start with headquarters?

21 MS. LONGO: Yes, I have some questions.

22 My name is Giovanna Longo, I'm with COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

1 the Office of General Counsel. I have some quest 2 for Mr. Cleveland.

3 MR. COUTU: He's getting a drink of water.

4 MS. LONGO: Okay, well we'll wait for Mr.

5 Cleveland to come back.

6 MR. CLEVELAND: I'm here.

7 MS. LONGO: There you are, okay.

8 First of all, can you hear me?

9 MR. CLEVELAND: Yes, I can.

10 MS. LONGO: Can you hear me okay? Okay.

11 Mr. Cleveland, your presentation 12 consistently focused on whether or not anyone 13 reported, quote, "an odor of alcohol," unquote.

14 MR. CLEVELAND: Correct.

15 MS. LONGO: Okay.

16 Is that the only way in which sorRe 17 can report a fitness for duty concern? Is there 18 other way they could report a concern?

19 MR. CLEVELAND: There are other ways they ca 20 report a concern.

21 MS. LONGO: Okay.

22 Suppose one of these welders had s, COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

54 1 to* *quote, "I ain't going to work for a" 2 blankety-blank, expletive deleted, "drunk like him,"

3 unquote; is that a report of a fitness for duty 4 concern?

5 MR. CLEVELAND: Yes.

6 MS. LONGO: Okay.

7 MR. COUTU: Let me expand upon that. It could 8 be. Depending on whether the individual's 9 observations were based on his performance at work or 10 based on his knowledge of the individual's habits 11 outside of work.

12 MS. LONGO: Okay.

13 Mr. Cleveland, we too have information 14 that certain people said they did not report a, 15 quote, "odor of alcohol," unquote. But we also have 16 information that certain people reported that they 17 thought, to, that they thought 18 was drunk. And we' have corroboration from 19 three individuals that admitted that he 20 received reports from at least two of these people 21 that they thought was drunk.

22 MR. CLEVELAND: Our investigation --

COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

55 1 MS. LONGO: So if your -- so what I am saying 2 is, if your investigation focused on whether somebody 3 reported an "odor of alcohol," you missed the boat.

4 MR. COUTU: I think we're going to let Mr.

5 Walker, who conducted the investigations, help to 6 answer some of your questions at this time.

7 MS. LONGO: Before Mr. Walker responds, in 8 connection with this same point that I'm making I 9 have several other questions, but this disconnect 10 between what you found and what we found I think has 11 to do with this focus on, quote, "odor of alcohol,"

12 unquote and there's more to it.

13 MR. CLEVELAND: We understand the distinction 14 and we too developed the same information as part of 15 our investigation. The -- if you look at the sum 16 total of what we developed in our investigation, you 17 can definitely argue that the general opinion -- or 18 there was a general opinion out there that some folks 19 believedtrlili to be a drunk. We did not develop 20 that anybody believed to be drunk at work.

21 And he focused on the odor of alcohol because that 22 would certainly be, at work, something that would be COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

56 1 actionable under our program.

2 MS. LONGO: Okay, well this is an important 3 point, Mr. Cleveland, because the evidence that we 4 have developed that 01 developed -- first of all I 5 want to ask, was interviewed?

6 MR. WALKER: I interviewed him.

7 MS. LONGO: Okay.

8 MR. CLEVELAND: Yes.

9 MS. LONGO: Okay.

10 c7tells us that 11 came into a trailer, the trailer where 12 and were seated and said, quote, "that two 13 individuals told him, quote, 'they ain't going to 14 work for an," expletive deleted, "drunk like fit 15 unquote.

16 We also have evidence from 17 his testimony was that 7nadmitted in 18 December of that year that and *told him 19 that they thought was drunk. Not that 20 they smelled alcohol but they thought he was drunk.

21 We have evidence from 22 I'm sorry, from mister -- excuse me, I'm getting COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

  • nn P rCOTTY FARM RD.. WHEATON. IL. (630) 653-1622

57 1 these names confused a little bit --

2 the foreman :in question. told us also 3 that in December, aid, yeah; two people 4 came to him and said that they thought s 5 drunk, drunk or smelled of alcohol,Q 6 couldn't remember which, whatC[said. But 7 they thought he was, at that time, impaired.

8 So that I am concerned that you 9 focused on "odor of alcohol" when there is more to 10 it, and telling you, "Yeah, never 11 said to me that these people said 12 smelled of alcohol," well that's true, but he also said thatsaid 13 that these two people 14 thought that was drunk at that time. Are 15' you aware of that?

16 MR. COUTU: We are. I'd like Mr. Walker to 17 address that if you would allow us'some time to 18 discuss the issues? We were aware of some claims.

19 They later were contradicted, we believe.

20 And, Mr. Walker, if you would?

21 MR. WALKER: Yes. Good morning.

22 MS. LONGO: Good morning.

COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

AnO S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

58 1 MR. WALKER: My name is Hal Walker. I was the 2 person asked to do the investigation at the Kewaunee 3 nuclear power station. As a part of the request for 4 the investigation included was there any FFD issues 5 associated with D&Z, Day & Zimmerman NPS? My 6 questions to these gentlemen, and I did speak to them 7 on December 17, Monday December 17 I spoke witho 8 Iabout several issues associated with the 9 welding program and any idea of any suggestion about 10 fitness for duty. I didn't -- 1 didn't couch it in 11 a, "Did you smell alcohol?" "Did you report a smell 12 of alcohol?" I couched it this manner to keep it 13 from anything. I asked him --

14 MS. LONGO: Mr. Walker, I'm sorry for 15 interrupting you but on your statement that you 16 interviewed and -you asked a question,. was 17 he aware of a fitness for duty concern; did you ask 18 him whether he was aware of a fitness for duty 19 concern with' in August of 2001?

20 MR. WALKER: I'm going to answer your question.

21 MS. LONGO: Okay.

22 MR. WALKER: Fitness for duty issues. Mr.

COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

11^

t'rThrqv VAPM RD.. WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

59 1 was asked if he was aware of any Day &

2 Zimmerman NPS employees who had been known to work at 3 Kewaunee while unfit for duty. That should encompass 4 odor, smell, impairment, et cetera. Lj 5 responded by saying, "Not that I know of." That's in 6 quotes.

7 was asked if he had any 8 knowledge from any source of anyone working inside 9 the KNPP protected area while exhibiting the smell of 10 alcohol. So I went from fitness for duty issues to 11 smell of alcohol. He responded in the negative.

12 Then I asked was he aware further if 13 -cl o**hIimself exhibited the smell of 14 alcohol on his breath inside the protected area? He 15 responded that he had no knowledge of 16 smelling of alcohol. He was open, appeared complete, 17 and I went from fitness for duty to the finer element 18 of smell, and then also tor- And I got 19 negatives from him on each one.

20 MS. LONGO: Okay, Mr. Walker --

21 MR. WEIL: If I may --

22 MS. LONGO: Mr. Walker, then I think this is COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

C OnM TTv VAPM RD.. WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

60 1 where the disconnect is. Your questions focussed on 2 smell of alcohol. testimony to 01 was, 3 no, he was not aware of fitness for duty concerns 4 when the general question was asked. But When he was 5 asked about this specific incident, he says, "Yeah 6 came in the trailer and and I were 7 there and aid, 'These two people said they 8 ain't going to work for an," expletive, "drunk like 91 p there was no mention of odor of alcohol. So 10 any questions about odor of alcohol would not have 11 triggered his memory, and what I .am saying is I think 12 that what we got was more complete information.

13 MR. WALKER: I was unaware of any suggested 14 circumstance of a trailer. What I was doing was 15 giving him a general, overall, broad question, and 16 then later into a more definitive question, and then 17 into t himself, which I believe should 18 have elicited any comments including what you're 19 suggesting regarding the trailer.

20 MS. LONGO: But as I understand as you just 21 explained the questions, all of them were focused on

'22 smell of alcohol, and that's not what he knew about.

COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

-- -- 1 - 1ýý~ Ir.7TTThTýArln'h%7 TT I O -3r% cc.1C)

61 1 What he knew was that two people thought Mr.

2 .*,'eas drunk.

3 MR. WALKER: Well, on these --

4 MS. LONGO: And he did not -- let me finish.

5 Your questions were, What is your knowledge? What is 6 your knowledge? All he knew is that somebody, 7 ,came in and said two people thought 8 was drunk. So I think that it's understandable that 9 your questions would not have elicited this 10 particular incident.

11 MR. COUTU: I think we have a couple of issues 12 here. No. 1, I think you're making the leap that an 13 individual referred to as "a drunk" is in fact 14 impaired on the job. We did not -- we did not, we 15 were unable to establish through any of our 16 interviews with specific questions about whether Mr.

17 as ever impaired on the job, we were 18 unable to establish that.

19 Further, we conducted a follow-up 20 investigation in preparation for this conference.

21 I've just asked Mr. Dan Craft to come to the table.

22 Dan, it's my understanding that you did interview --

COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

C, en-'rmv rpM Dn WRF.ATON. IL. (630) 653-1622

62 1 MR. CRAFT: Both n 2 MR. COUTU: -- AMr. Mr. and and we 3 believe that we have additional information that 4 substantiates the fact that Mr. 1 was not 5 impaired while on the job. AndI would like to give 6 Mr. Craft an opportunity to talk about that.

7 MS. LONGO: Okay, but this is -- this is an 8 important point because I think that what I'm getting 9 to is, you know, we do have independent corroboration 10 from three people that, in fact, 7did 11 acknowledge that he knew that there was a fitness for 12 duty concern about and in connection with 13 this I have to ask you, you, during the presentation, 14 I believe you listed, it was Mr. Cleveland who said 15 thasaid he did detect a faint odor of 16 alcohol but he didn't think that was 17 impaired so I he. didn't do anything. Well, why. was 18 he smelling -

19 breath if people didn't report that they thought he 20 was drunk? Is he generally going around doing that, 21 or how does that happen? How does that happen?

22 MR. COUTU: I think it was through incidental COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

enr C? *(-TMV PARM RD.. WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

63

/ 1 contact with the individual. He worked with the 2 individual.

3 But let's let Mr. Craft relate his 4 findings.

5 MS. LONGO: Thank you.

6 MR. CRAFT: Hello, my name again is Dan Craft.

7 NMC had asked me to take a look at this investigation 8 from an objective outsider point of view and --

9 MR. ROGOFF: And he is our employee, but while 10 he was still an outsider, new at the company, so ii there's no confusion there.

12 MR. CRAFT: I did take a -- I was unfettered in 13 my access and my ability to look at the entire 14 investigation and then take it wherever I thought we 15 needed to go with it. And I did interview Mr.

16 and related to me the same 17 incident that you are referring to where he was in an 18 office with and came in and 19 said that "Our hell child," meaning "and 20 said that they don't want to work for an,"

21 expletive, "drunk." And' told me that two 22 days.later he went and talked to Jabout that COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

(;0 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

64 1 and asked him about that incident and told 2 him that that's not what he said. That he said that 3 they needed to get some breath mints. So I 4 asked him exactly, and he said, well, that -- that 5 meant that. Qf as a drunk. But I 6 asked -- I told him that reasonable people can infer 7 that, but I wanted to know accurately, specifically, 8 what he had said? An had told that 9 *needed breath mints. So it wasv 10 that was editorializing to me what he thought 1i1 meant, and I asked him not to do that but to be 12 accurate and that's how he came up with that 13 statement of told him that needed

14. breath mints.

15 MS. LONGO: Okay. I'm sorry, could you please 16 tell me your name again? I'm bad with names.

17 MR. CRAFT: Dan Craft.

18 MS. LONGO: Craft. Mr. Craft. In your 19 re-investigation, did you talk to N 20 again? What I think is very significant is that the 21 person of concern whose fitness for duty was in 22 question told-us that dmitted in December, COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

65 1 "Yeah, these two guys came and told me they knew Mr.

2 had a problem.".

3 MR. CRAFT: No, I did not.

4 MS. LONGO: Are you aware of this? Did you 5 interview again?

6 MR. CRAFT: No, I did not.

7 MS. LONGO: Are you aware -- okay. Well, we 8 did, and so you can see where we're coming from.

9 MR. CRAFT: Yes.

10 MS. LONGO: Especially whe makes 11 an admission like this, we have to take it very 12 seriously. This is against his interest; I think you 13 understand that.

14 MR. CRAFT: Yes.

15 MR. CAPRISTO: In our supplement, Mr. Walker is 16 just -- Mr. Walker is just reviewing his extensive 17 notes, but we did intervie, I believe 18 it was in January 2002. If we could have a moment to 19 find the reference?

20 MR. DYER: While we're waiting, a question I 21 have, I'm trying to put together the time line on all 22 this. There was an initial investigation-that you COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

00 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

66 1 performed, then there was the supplemental 2 investigation that you performed, and then there was 3 our 01 investigation, and then there was an 4 independent review performed by Mr. Craft. I'm just 5 trying to put together a time line for these, you 6 know, when they overlap and where were we in the 7 process, if you would. So, Mr. Cleveland, can you 8 address that?

9 MR. CLEVELAND: Yeah, I think I can help clarify 10 that. We had the initial investigation conducted by 11 Mr. Hal Walker. And I think all those findings were 12 provided to you folks.

13 MR. DYER: That's the report of February '02.

14 MR. CLEVELAND: Correct.

15 We then, the next major data point, if 16 you will, would be in June of 2002 where we were 17 provided the document byalleging the 18 conversation that took place between and 19 *,and the follow-up that we did on that 20 wherein we developed essentially the same thing that 21 your counsel is briefing regarding the reference to 22 "a drunk."

COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

900 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

67 1 MR. WALKER: I think I can respond now.

2 MR. CLEVELAND: And then --

3 MR. DYER: That's June '02.

4 MR. CLEVELAND: June of '02.

5 MR. DYER: Aniddocument concerning 6 what?

7 MR. CLEVELAND: He provided us a document .that 8 alleged that a conversation had taken place between 9 and "in which admits 10 to -that people had come to him with the odor of alcohol, particularly and a 12 Cand that we had interviewed them immediately 13 following receipt of that and both denied the 14 truthfulness, accuracy and, particularly, that the 15 statement regarding odor of alcohol was not in fact 16 made.

17 MR. DYER: Is that what you're referring to as 18 the supplemental investigation earlier?

19 MR. CLEVELAND: That was the investigation that 20 we referred to that we did in June of 2002.

21 MR. DYER: Okay.

22 MS. LONGO: Could I interrupt at this point?

COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622 'N

-Nb-610ý 68 1 This is again --

2 MR. DYER: Ginny, before we get done I just want 3 to have them complete their time line.

4 MS. LONGO: Oh, okay. We'll come back to it, 5 but, again, this is another disconnect and I think 6 it's important for you to understand what we have and 7 what you don't have on this point.

8 MR. CLEVELAND: Okay.

9 MR. COUTU: I think it would be best to answer i0 Mr. Dyer's question, to start at the beginning when 11 the allegation occurred, when we started our initial 12 investigation, when we concluded it, when we denied 13 access, when we had the additional concerns raised, 14 when we began our supplemental investigation, when we 15 received the unsigned, quote-unquote, affidavit, et 16 cetera. And I think it would be really important for 17 us to go through that because this again goes back to 18 the fact that initially all of these people, except 19 for told us they never reported. And 20 after we took action we had conflicting statements 21 beginning to develop and we went with the experience 22 of our investigators of when they typically get the COUNTY COURT REPORTERS., INC.

9()n A. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

1 most truthful statements from individuals during 2 interviews, which is during the initial intervieý 3 they typically get the most truthful information, 4 I think it's important to understand this time l1 5 understand when additional information surfaced 6 following actions that were taken.

7 MR. CLEVELAND: Okay, so anyway, Hal, do yoL 8 have the exact date of the supplemental investiga 9 so we can get that?

10 MR. WALKER: The supplemental investigation.

11 MR. CLEVELAND: While Hal is researching tha 12 will continue on.

13 MR. WALKER: Two investigative reports were 14 prepared by me. One was closed January 7, 2002.

it supplemental report was closed January 30th, 2002 16 MR. DYER: Okay, so both of those reports we 17 the basis for, I think, your letter to us of Febr 18 8?

19 MR. CAPRISTO: That's correct.

20 MR. DYER: Okay.

21 MR. CLEVELAND: Then we go to the June time 22 frame.

COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

M ICNTTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

70 1 MR. COUTU: When did we deny access?

2 MR. CLEVELAND: We denied access to the four 3 welders at the end of February 2002.

4 MR. MADEDA: And that was and 6 MR. CLEVELAND:

7 MR. COUTU: When was their access placed on 8 hold?

9 MR. CLEVELAND: It was placed on hold, I would 10 have to specifically research that, Tom, but that was 11 approximately upon the discovery that the people did 12 not report the odor of alcohol we put it on hold.

13 MR. COUTU: Which would have been during the 14 initial investigation phase --

15 MR. CLEVELAND: Correct.

16 MR. COUTU: -- prior to the --

17 MR. CLEVELAND: December time frame of 2001.

18 MR. BERSON: And just for completeness, when 19 were the individuals first notified or become aware 20 that their access had been put on hold or denied?

21 MR. CLEVELAND: The denial would have been by 22 letter at the end of February.

COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

71 1 MR. BERSON: Okay.

2 MR. COUTU: When did they know they were on 3 hold?

4 MR. CLEVELAND: They were not specifically 5 notified of being on hold. They didn't have access 6 at our site at the time, and this was not until we 7 actually denied access that we formally notified them 8 in writing.

9 MR. BERSON: Okay.

10 MR. CLEVELAND: So then you go to the June time 11 frame. We talked about the receipt of the 12 information from the document alleging 13 the conversation that had taken place between Mr.

14 M the follow-up we did to that, and 15 then that takes us to the follow-up work that Dan 16 Craft --

17 MR. DYER: And when did Mr. Craft's 18 investigation --

19 MR. CLEVELAND: The middle to the end of June 20 2003.

21 MR. DYER: That was in preparation -- that was 22 as a result of our letter to you?

.COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

72 1 MR. ARENT: Yes.

2 MR. DYER: Thank you.

3 Ginny, go ahead.

4 MS. PEDERSON: Just a moment. Hal was going to 5 answer an earlier question.

6 MR. WALKER: Yes. This is Walker again.

7 Okay, on January 17th, January 17, 8 2001, I interviewed along with Mr.

9 Capristo. During that interview, he stated -- we 10 were talking about why he would offer himself up for 11 a for-cause testing --

12 MR. ROGOFF: You said 2001. You meant to. say 13 2002, January 2002.

14 MR. WALKER: I'm sorry, yeah, 2002.

15 Anyway, was asked. why he 16 felt he had to defend himself .by voluntarily offering 17 to be for-cause tested. Well, he said he was willing 18 to be for-cause tested at any time.

19 And who told 'him he had a smell of 20 alcohol on his breath, if he was offering himself for 21 for-cause testing? He stated that when in 22 August of 2001, or thereabouts told him that he --

COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

73 1 that smelled of alcohol. And then the 2 question was, well, whe told you that he 3 smelled alcohol on your breath, did he volunteer to 4 take a for-cause examination? 'said he 5 was ready to be for-cause tested whel old him 6 that he smelled the alcohol and has no idea why 7 W jdid not proceed to have him tested.

8 Then he went into are you friends with 9 because there was a connection there 10 that might have been giving him lenience because of 11 12 We went on from that point to the next 13 phase of questioning was I asked him have other 14 individuals, other than' raised this is concern with you? Causing you to have breath mints 16 in the morning along with Scope, which was part of 17 his commentary. He said there was one other guy.

18 asked who? He said, "I would rather not say." I 19 said, "Was it a Day & Zimmerman NPS welder?" He 20 said, "No." I said, "Was it a Kewaunee Nuclear Power 21 Plant personnel? Was it a supervisor?" He said 22 someone told a supervisor that he had alcohol on his COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

4o q rYTThTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

74 1 breath. I said, "Was the supervisor Day & Zimmerman 2 or Nuclear Management?" He said it was Nuclear 3 Management, but he refused to tell me and Mr. Aldo --

4 Mr. Capristo at that time who that individual was.

5 So that's the questioning that went on.

6 There was another thing in here, he 7 was talking about the subject of a breath mint and 8 things of that nature, that goes back to some other 9 issues we don't need to get into at this moment, but 10 that's in response to your question about aski~ng him 11 directly of others, questioning him on it.

12 MS. LONGO: Okay.

13 But, again, what we have is that he 14 made a statement to us, = that in 15 December, not in August 2001, but December, hI 16 came over and they visited and told him, 17 "Yeah, those two guys came and told me you were 18 either drunk or smelled of alcohol."

19 MR. WALKER: 1 ad 20 MS. LONGO: In August 2001.

21 Andthis is admission 22 against interest.

COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

75 1 MR. COUTU: That may be information that we do 2 not have.

3 MR. WALKER: He had plenty of opportunity to 4 tell me the same thing and didn't. And at the end of 5 it, Mr. Capristo directly asked ' he 6 had ever reported to work in an unfit condition for 7 any reason. And his response was a clear "No."

8 MS. LONGO: Well, if he had a drinking problem, 9 that would not be surprising.

10 MR. WALKER: That wouldn't be surprising, but 11 the question was asked and answered. And also these 12 others.

13 MS. LONGO: Okay.

14 MR. WALKER: It was asked and answered.

15 MS. LONGO: And I want to come back to Mr. --

16 I'm sorry, it's just me, you know, I'm just bad at 17 names. Mr. Cleveland, yeah, okay.

18 What I wanted to bring up and 19 emphasize to you earlier was this poi'nt about your 20 re-interview of fter you found out about 21 this document, or supposedly says I had this 22 conversation with and said that these COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

76 two people said, or some people said that 2 smelled of alcohol. We also questioned 3 about that document, and told us the same 4 thing. No, *\did not say that people came and 5 reported thatQ smelled of alcohol. What 6 told me in December of 2001 was that two 7 people came and saido was drunk.

8 MR. CLEVELAND: The statement --

9 MR. COUTU: "Was drunk" or "was a drunk"?

10 MS. LONGO: No, not "was a drunk," but was drunk 11 at the time.

12 MR. CLEVELAND: The information that we had 13 gotten from is that-hed 14 admitted to him that these two individuals did not 15 want to work for a drunk. We did not receive 16 information indicating that they considered him drunk 17 at work, no specific behaviors which were referenced, 18 including the odor of alcohol, indicating that 19 something had occurred or been observed at work which 20 was actionable.

21 This was clearly through the sum total 22 of the interviewing that we did, there was, if you COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

77 1 will, the urban legend throughout that 2 was a drunk or a heavy drinker. But in terms of 3 specific behaviors at work, we did several 4 interviews, including one that was developed for us 5 as a source that we could interview which would truly 6 know whether",as unfit at work or had 7 the odor of alcohol, this was a his supervisor., ork worked'since 1985, 8

9 between August of 2001 and November of 2001 he had 10 daily contact with 3pproxima.tely three 11 to four times a day, stopped by 12 office every morning and never had occasion to 13 question his fitness for duty or ever detected the 14 odor of alcohol.

15 MR. ROGOFF: If I might, I have a document that 16 Mr. Craft developed. He asked in his interviews for 17 to mark up this document (indicating), that 18 you probably have all seen, that would make it true.

19 And this is the original copy. It's written in*

20 Vol handwriting. And when he writes, he says 21 what he does is he marks up that document that 22 you've seen and he writes, 'lnformed me COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD.', WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

78 1 that he spoke to Harold Walker the allegations that 2 (o 1 that's in the print, and then in 3 this blue ink in the hand of "would not 4 work for him because he's a drunk." That's what he 5 wrote. "He's a drunk." He didn't write --

6 MS. LONGO: Sir, that refers to the August 7 incident, but what I am talking about is December.

8 What tol n December was that these 9 two had reported that was at the time 10 drunk. At the time drunk. That's what he told us.

11 And we questioned -- he discussed it at some length, 12 so what I'm telling you is that I'm not interpreting 13 what we have. That is what we have.

14 MR. ROGOFF: Maybe Mr. Craft-can come here, come 15 back to the table and speak to what the time frame is 16 that's being addressed here.

17 MS. LONGO: Okay. And it's possible we are 18 talking about two different times.

19 MR. CRAFT: It's my understanding -- excuse me, 20 Dan Craft again.

21 It's my understanding 22 didn't work at either of these facilities in the late COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

4nnA. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

79

-' 1 fall of 2001, that he stopped working at some time in 2 October of 2001.

3 MS. LONGO: -Right. But why is that important?

4 MR. CLEVELAND: "1 think you -- the point you're 5 trying to make is you're trying to nail down the 6 reference in time as to when the statement was made, 7 correct? It was in the December -- the late 2001-8 early 2002 time frame?

9 MS. LONGO: Yes, because -made two 10 statements about what asaid. He made a Ii statement about what said in August when 12 everybody was employed.at the plant, and he made a 13 'statement about. what told him privately in 14 December of 2001. And what I am talking about, and 15 the disconnect between what you've got and what I've 16 -got is about December 2001. You have got part of 17 what I've got. What you have is that is 18 telling you, "Yeah, did not say to me in 19 December 2001 that these two welders came and said 20 -. smells of alcohol."' You have that, we have 21 that. But we-also have a statement by 22 the same time, he said, "Yeah, idn't say, COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

....,Tnrrv ZLPM rn.. WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

80 1 anything about smell of alcohol. What he said, what 2 told me was these two guys said that 3 was drunk at the time." Not "a drunk."

4 "Was drunk." And I think you don't have that, from 5 what I understand. I'm not criticizing you. I'm 6 just trying to, you know, make sure you understand 7 where we're coming from and that I understand where 8 you're coming from.

9 MR. COUTU: It's a little difficult to do that 10 without having both sides of the -- of what's been 11 revealed in interviews. We only have what we have, 12 which is a tremendous number of conflicting 13 statements, like, "He was loaded every morning" 14 versus, "I don't know anything about him being 15 drunk." And we're having difficulty. You may in 16 fact have information that we don't have. That's 17 probably part of our frustration. What we'll try to 18 do is give you the information that we developed. It 19 does not surprise me that you may have information 20 that conflicts with ours since we have information 21 that conflicts with our own information from the same 22 sources.

COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

81 1 So, again, I think Mr. Walker is the 2 best individual to talk about statements being made 3 by individuals about impairment on the job.

4 MR. ROGOFF: I think there's an important point.

5 If I might, I think the one thing we want to do here, 6 since we believe, Mr. Craft's best recollection is 7 that in the time frame in which you are stating the 8 statement was made, that was not working --

9 not. So the conversation 10 would not have occurred. That's something that ought 11 to be verifiable one way or the other by going back 12 to records; right? Site records? Whether they were 13 on-site or not?

14 MR. CLEVELAND: That definitely would be 15 verifiable. I think the couple of points that we're 16 discussing here is, one, what statement didor.

17 make toin December? We'll use 18 that time frame. And then, what was the reference 19 that was made in the office back in the July-August 20 time frame of 2001; correct?

21 MS. LONGO: Correct. And I just want to point 22 out that this conversation between" and COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 -S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

82 1 in December was not on the site. -said it 2 was, you know, I can't remember, it was his apartment 3 ord apartment, but it was not on the site.

4 They were not on the site, so your site records are 5 not going tell you anything about whether they had a 6 conversation.

7 MR. CLEVELAND: Correct. And we understand 8 that. We believe a --

9 MS. LONGO: Okay.

10 MR. CLEVELAND: The conversation took place in 11 V aiUMapartment.

12. MR. ROGOFF: Which conversation, Randy?

13 MR. CLEVELAND: The-December conversation.

14 MR. COUTU: There's two. There's one that 15 allegedly took place in his apartment and one that 16 allegedly took place in that -- in the Day &

17 Zimmerman offices.

18 MR. CLEVELAND: Correct, back in the July-August 19 time frame.

20 MS. LONGO: Okay.

21 And the other thing I wanted to point 22 out, I'm not so sure that there is a conflict in what COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

83 1 we have. It's simply that we have additional 2 information, and that's why we, in the synopsis, we 3 tried to summarize it to you. Now that synopsis, 4 unfortunately, did not include the information 5 about -- which is really the most troubling, I think, 6 is Mstatement to us, he admits that 7 said, "Yeah, these two guys reported that 8 you, *were drunk."

.. 9 MS. PEDERSON: What I would --

10 MS. LONGO: At the time so --

I1 MS. PEDERSON: Since we --

12 MR. CLEVELAND: Hal Walker has something to add.

13 MR. WALKER:. Yeah, can I add something here?

14 You're talking abou kay, and you're is talking about December. Do you have a definitive 16 date in December? Or is it just a December date that 17 he had --

18 MS. LONGO: I think it was-in December.

19 MR. WALKER: In December, okay.

20 December 11, Tuesday, December.12, 21 approximately 8:00 p.m., I had a conversation with 22 a telephone. You are correct, he was not COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

  • nA .. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

84 1 working at the site. He was working at a 2 different -- he was not working for NMC at that time.

3 And a lot of this has to do with other issues, but 4 when I got to this I asked 91 again, arnd I 5 don't know how -- any way to ask these people,.

6 Ware you aware of any D&Z NPS employees working 7 inside the protected area in violation of fitness for 8 duty policy?" I'm not trying to limit it to smell, 9 I'm not trying to limit it to dope or whatever. He 10 states to me that he said he was unaware of anyone 11 working at Kewaunee in violation of the policy.

12 So I went further. I said, 13 do. you know," I asked him if he knewl*w 14 And I'll get to it, everybody appears to 15 have known so he knew 16 And there was some insinuation at one point tha .

17 1000 didn't do something because was 18 friends with his. *" i or something of that nature.

19 So I asked him, Wjaid he knew as 20 an individual who had worked with 21 at both Kewaunee and Point Beach for many years. And 22 had worked in the same service, inspection service.

COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

85 1 I asked him if he had smelled anything 2 on the breath of was asked 3 if he had ever had smelled alcohol to any extent on 4 the breath of and said he has not 5 smelled alcohol on the breath ofwhile 6 working at Kewaunee.

7 further said that 8 would have reported to work, walk by his office 9 informing him or that he was present and 10 go on about his day. And that was his total of his il comments to me, and this took place December 11th.

12 So, if he had these kind of conversations, this was 13 very open to him to make his comments to me and he 14 didn't.

15 MS. LONGO: Mr. Walker, the conversation between 16 4!!Pj I 'and411." was in December. Now I 17 don't know when in December. Your conversation with 18 Wj-was December 11th.

19 MR. WALKER: That's correct.

20 MS. LONGO: And a reference at another place in 21 somebody else's -- somebody else had a conversation 22 with -- the two people had conversations with Mr.

COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

86 1 about this August incident apparently were 2 very close in time and the other person said he 3 thought'it was around the holidays, which would be 4 after December 11th.

5 MR. WALKER: Or around Thanksgiving.

6 MS. LONGO: Well, no, the testimony was 7 December, January, around the holidays.

8 MR. WALKER: Okay.

9 MS. LONGO: But the person is talking about 10 Christmas, New Year, so I think what it sounded to me Ii like, after putting everything together, it looks to 12 me like this conversation, these two admissions that 13 made to -ad to ere around 14 the Christmas holiday, which would have been after 15 your discussion of December l1th, which was why ---

16 wouldn't have mentioned it.

17 MR. WALKER: Okay.

18 MS. LONGO: Okay. And --

19 MR. WEIL: Ginny, excuse me a minute?

.20 MS. LONGO: Yeah.

21 MR. WEIL: I may have a point of clarification 22 that might help as far as a date. Mr. Walker, it COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

87 1 appEears the conversation between 2 occurred some time in December after your 3 intE .rviews with if that helps you at 4 all.

5 MR. WALKER: What about my interview with 6

7 *was interviewed on two 8 occasions.

9 MR. WEIL: I understand. I can't place that, 10 but I can place it after your interview with -- at 11 least one of your interviews with 12 MR. WALKER: Okay.

13 MR. WEIL: That's all I can do right now.-

14 MS. LONGO: Okay.

15 MR. ROGOFF: Could we just have Mr. Craft -- you 16 know, Mr. Craft did go back then and re-interview" 17 and maybe, Dan, you could just review a little 18 bit of, you know, did You. givan 19 opportunity to talk about the smell of alcohol and 20 the state of -- physical state o 21 MR. CRAFT: Yes. L old me that nobody ever 22 cameto him and reported that smelled COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

88 1 of alcohol or had been drinking.

2 MS. LONGO: Are you speaking of 3 couldn't hear.

4 MR. CRAFT: Yeah, 5 MS. LONGO: Okay.

6 MR. ROGOFF: So, this conversation would have 7 been well after the December time frame when, given 8 the opportunity, he didn't come forward with that 9 information. Which is not to say he didn't say it 10 before, but it's just not what he told us.

ii MR. DYER: Let me ask a question first. I guess 12 the question I have is: Mr. Craft just said that 13 said nobody had Come to him about concern about 14 j fitness for duty?

15 MR. CRAFT: Correct.

16 MR. DYER: I think the question, and what Ginny 17 was asking was, had had conversations with 18 about somebody coming to 19 MR. CRAFT: Correct.

20 MR. DYER: Now, did you verify or --

21 MR. CRAFT: Yes.

22 MR. DYER: And he said that discussion did not COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

89 1 occur?

2 MR. CRAFT: No, that -- if I understand your 3 question right, did someone go to *"ýabout 4

5 MR. DYER: Basically, what I understood Miss 6 Longo to say, and correct me if I'm wrong, Ginny, was 7 that we have evidence that says thati S'was 8 told by -- that somebody had cbme to him 9 about fitness for duty.

10 MR. CRAFT: Correct.

11 MS. LONGO: Right. That he was drunk at the 12 time. There was no mention of smell of alcohol. And 13 this gets me back to my point is you keep on focusing 14 on "smell of alcohol," but that's not what people 15 were talking about.

16 MR. CRAFT: No, that's correct, it was --

17 MR. DYER: The question, in fact, is not whether 18 had direct knowledge, or somebody had come 19 directly toi It was more was he aware thad i~knew?

20 21 MR. CRAFT: Right. But I asked him that anyway, 22 to be thorough, to see did anybody come to him.

COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

90 1 But to answer your question, yes, this 2 conversation between nd had taken 3 place, but there's a slightly different 4 interpretation or version. Whated told me 5 that -told him is that --

6 MS. LONGO: Well, di tell you that 7 4001said, "Nobody ever told me that there was 8 any kind of problem with k11 " -A4-1f] ' did" 9 say that?

10 MS. PEDERSON: Ginny, can we let Mr. Craft 11 finish his summary, please?

12 MS. LONGO: Okay.

13 MS. PEDERSON: Thank you.

14 MR. CRAFT: I had asked a specific question, did 15 W ever confront ith this? The fact 16 that did anybody ever come to him with the smell of 17 alcohol. o 1eing unfit for duty and so 18 forth. An told me that he did have a 19 conversation in apartment where he 20 specifically asked him about this and it was the 21 version, the accurate -- I had him write it down in 22 his own handwriting (indicating), is that and COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

91 didn't want to work for ecause he was 2 a drunk. Not "drunk," but "a drunk." And I asked 3 him about the affidavit and why he didn't sign it?

4 He said because it wasn't accurate. So I asked him, 5 well, what would make it accurate? And he told me 6 the series of corrections. I had him correct it, 7 initial it on each of the corrections and then sign 8 it, and then I actually signed it as a witness to him 9 signing it on June 27th of this year.

10 MS. LONGO: Mr. Craft, in addition --

11 MS. PEDERSON: Did he elaborate at all on the 12 context of him being "a drunk"? Was there any 13 further exploration of what that meant? Whether on 14 site, off site, anything further in that regard?

15 MR. CRAFT: No. And jhad talked to 16 bout it, about these -- this conversation, 17 had -- did not witness, himself, any fitness for 18 duty, didn't see the slurring of the speech or the 19 bloodshot eyes or the gait or anything; that he could 20 smell an almost faint, imperceptible smell of old 21 alcohol, like if he had a lot to drink the night 22 before, went-to bed early and then just got up in'the COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

92 1 morning and didn't clean up. That seemed to be his 2 explanation of that.

3 1 asked-about that too and 4 that he had socialized with M Ohhaand that 5 was a heavy drinker, that he would drink at 6 night, then go to bed, 8:30, 9:00 o'clock, the latest 7 would be 9:30, and he would drink all the way up 8 until he went to bed, get up in the morning and come 9 to work and he would have this residual smell of 10 alcohol.

11 MS. PEDERSON: But no one caused -- that didn't 12 cause him to take a for-cause test, no when asked 13 that he take a for-cause test?

14 MR. CRAFT: Correct. It wa opinion, 15 based upon being a supervisor -- and he would also 16 say that, you know, he knew the history of 17 for twenty-some years and that he had this 18 reputation, he had this smell about him.

19 .had supervised for years and 20 had had him tested 15 times, always negative. That 21 he had taken this medication that made him smell.

22 That he had a problem with his throat, that it didn't COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

93 1 close properly, that any residual odor would still 2 linger. So - was aware of it, but he also told 3 me that he would watch him and check and he did his 4 job and that's what he was -- he,.M was 5 concerned with: Was he fit for duty? And did he do 6 his job? He didn't want to get hung up in the 7 scuttlebutt or the mudslinging because of this 8 reputation and people, you know, bad-mouthing 9 He was more concerned-with did he do his 10 job and was he fit for duty? And his professional 11 opinion at the time, and we can argue whether it was 12 right or wrong, it was his judgment that he was fit 13 for duty.

14 MS. PEDERSON: And elied on the is behavioral observation to make that statement?

16 MR. CRAFT:, Yes.

17 MS. PEDERSON: Or that observation he was fit 18 for duty, even though he was aware he was a heavy 19 drinker, he chose not to have a for-cause test of*

20 21 MR. CRAFT: Correct.

22 PlusLa*would challenge him, COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

r OTrKThTV VARM RD.. WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

94 1 say, "If you think I'm drunk, let's go right now, 2 take me for a test," a idn't. Now, that 3 may be an error in judgment, and I think NMC had 4 counseled him on that and taken corrective action, 5 that that's not permissible in our sites, but that 6 was his opinion at the time given the circumstances, 7 and he did what he did why he did it.

8 MS. PEDERSON: Thank you.

9 MR. COUTU: I think also to put in perspective 10 maybe the two individuals that claimed to have this 11 conversation, one of those individuals was also the 12 individual who said, quote, "loaded every morning,"

13 "The ,foremarnlwas loaded every morning'" and later was 14 reported to say, "I don't know anything about him 15 being drunk." That he was escorted to the collection 16 point by the foreman and it turned out he was not 17 escorted to the collect collection point by the 18 foreman. That the collector recognized the foreman 19 as being "a little ripe"; and neither of the 20 collectors interviewed corroborated even the fact 21 that the individual escorted, that the foreman 22 escorted the individual to the collectors' site, nor COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

95 1 making a remark that the foreman was "a little ripe."

2 We also-have the claims, the erroneous 3 claims that individuals went through an access portal 4 together, one was pulled out of line for for-cause 5 testing, which our records do not substantiate; they 6 only substantiate a random test at some point after 7 that in the day.

8 You know, we could focus on one 9 statement made by this individual, but my sense is, 10 to get a real picture of what we are dealing with 11 here, you've got focus on the numerous conflicting 12 statements that this individual gave us. And we 13 went -- we went to NMC employees who work with this 14 individual to try to determine whether or not there 15 were any cases of unfitness for duty.

16 Mr. Walker?

17 MR. WALKER: Yes?

18 MR. COUTU: How many people would you say you 19 overall interviewed? And did any of them give you an 20 indication that there was ever a time that .

21 was on-site unfit for duty?

22 MR. WALKER: In both these investigations, with COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

96 1 all these issues included about 34 individuals I 2 interviewed. Out of those 34 individuals, 13 I 3 interviewed.directly regarding a fitness for duty 4 issue with or whatever they could find 5 out. Not one individual indicated to me that they 6 observed any impairment in this individual. I went 7 over very clearly, that was part of the testing that 8 was done in their training department and those 9 exhibits...

10 Now also another individual, a*.

11 A I will bring up now, who is really the person 12 who was -- the person who was in the alleged incident 13 wherein was tested and _as the 14 alleged reason for this drift of the smell back on 15 him causing him to be tested. I had this interview 16 with on December 9th, Sunday, December 9th 17 at approximately 7:00 p.m., and what he -- he told me 18 that it was not uncommon for to smell 19 of alcohol in the mornings but not appear to be 20 impaired.

21 And I went after him again and I said 22 to the extent, I asked him why he did not bring COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

97 1 behavior to the attention of management, 2 or any appropriate party? He said that if he had 3 seen while on the job stumbling around 4 he would have turned him in to the appropriate 5 parties; however, according t 6 as running a crew, and if he was that bad 7 why didn't his crew turn him in?

8 Now, I have to say that of everybody 9 here, no one expressed to me that the man exhibited 10 any impairment other than this smell of alcohol, 11 which seems to be pervasive. I talked to Mr.

12 Capristo, I said if we interviewed everybody on the 13 site, probably how many would say they smelled a 14 faint smell of alcohol onn Because it is came almost like this rumor, I interviewed other 16 individuals, al nd he was talking, 17 discussing about, well, the alleged incident wherein 18 Uad went through and another individual 19 had been tested. This seemed to be a pervasive 20 thought of him smelling of alcohol based on that 21 event which, to me, looks like a -- people just knew 22 him as, I hate to, quote-unquote, "a drunk." So this COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

98 1 one individual stated to me, he said 2 non-nuclear jobs he smelled alcohol on him, but never 3 on nuclear. Now where is the impairment? I didn't 4 see it. No one brought it to my attention.

5 MR. CLEVELAND: You also have to balance the 6 results of those interviews with interviews of other 7 individuals, credible individuals, such as 8 hich I detailed, who, again, had very regular 9 contact wit daily, multiple times per 10 day, very close proximity, early in the morning and 11 never detected neither the odor of alcohol, or had 12 reason to question his fitness. He is not unique.

13 we did a follow-up with him based on 14 Mr. Walker's initial results, and he too indicated 15 that he had --

16 MR. ROGOFF: You know, I think this is the first 17 time you're referring to Can you 18 identify him?

19 MR. CLEVELAND: Ws another craft 20 worker out there whom iUww w ould go to 21 occasionally to get some advice or help with the ISI 22 project. So he had some somewhat regular contact COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

99 1 with and, again, never detected the 2 odor of alcohol or had any reason to question fitness 3 for duty.

4 Another individual which we 5 interviewed, this was part, again, of Dan Craft's 6 follow-up, ahe is the NPSýeneral 7 foremannhat was hired onF/30 of 2001, and we 8 interviewed him and he again indicated that he had 9 multiple contacts withQ . never had any 10 reason to question his fitness, did not detect the 11 odor of alcohol and believed him to be a very 12 reliable worker.

13 Lso elaborated that'it's 14 his belief, based on what he characterized as 15 attitude, the attitude problem of nd 16 dthat if they had had a concern which they 17 believed was not being addressed adequately, they 18 would have gone to other folks in the chain at the 19 time.

20 And Ailso partially 21 corroborated our concern with the June 26 statements 22 that we identify in the employee file of COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

100 1 MR. ROGOFF: And if I could just make one more 2 point about what we call -- we can call this document 3 an "Affidavit" now, after it's been executed. That 4 it was done on June 27th of this year, so it was done 5 three weeks ago. Yes, it speaks to the March 6 conversation, but there would have been ample 7 opportunity when he marked this up to have said, "I 8 had a separate conversation in December," so --

9 MR. DYER: What document are you talking about?

10 I'm confused.

11 MR. ROGOFF: I'm talking about the document that 12 was titled "Affidavit" that was never executed, which 13 I believe Ms. Longo referred to in her conversation, 14 and that Mr. Craft, when he interviewed 15 who now seems to be kind of providing the smoking gun 16 facts, you know, that seems -- we were not aware of, 17 that I think it is -- he asked- to take the 18 document and in his hand to mark it up. This is the 19 original copy, you can see the blue, perhaps you 20 can't read it, but the blue ink.here and initialed 21 some changes to this. And each-time that he refers, 22 he talks about "a drunk," not "drunk." Admittedly, COUNTY COURT REPORTERS., INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

101 1 as Miss Longo correctly pointed out, this refers to 2 the March conversation, not to December --

3 MS. LONGO: To the August, August. August.

4 There was no March conversation.

5 MR. CLEVELAND: I believe the affidavit refers 6 to a conversation in March of 2002.

7 MR. WEIL: If I may at this point, counsel?

8 MR. ROGOFF: Yes, sir.

9 MR. WEIL: Our interview, of course, was 10 transcribed under oath and our information from 11 " bout his conversation in December with*

12 and he was referring back to nd 13 and we believe going back to --

14 remember, we're focusing on one issue in July of 15 2001. So going back to that, the conversation is, 16 "He had been drinking and was a drunk." That's the 17 quote.

18 MR. ROGOFF: But could you read the question and 19 the answer so we have some context there?

20 MR. WEIL: No, I don't want to go into that 21 because we're still predecisional, sir.

22 MR. ROGOFF: Okay.

COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

102 1 MR. WEIL: Just, please, take my word for it.

2 MR. COUTU: Are you saying he had been drinking 3 on the job? Or he had been drinking the night 4 before?

5 MR. WEIL: Sir, all we know, sir, is that it was 6 in the fabrication shop, this conversation came to 7 by the three welders. I'll set the 8 ground there. It was the fab shop, the limited 9 control area, had access to the protected 10 area.

11 MR. ROGOFF: Could you just read the quote again 12 for me?

13 MR. WEIL: "I remember him saying 'drinking' and 14 'was a drunk.'"

15 MR. COUTU: But its hard to understand the 16 context --

17 MR. WEIL: I understand.

18 MS. LONGO: If you will hold on a second. I 19 have --

20 MR. WEIL: Ginny, let me finish one other thing.

21 MS. LONGO: Right. And when you're through I'm 22 going to add something. There's additional stuff in COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

103 1 the testimony. I don't mean to --

2 MR. WEIL: Well, I'll let you decide how much 3 you want to go to.

4 But one thing I want to furnish to Mr.

5 Walker is continues that" h......

ad 6 stated that he denied to Mr. Walker that he had had'a 7 conversation with and NO 8 MR. WALKER: Right.

9 MR. WEIL: So, going to your conversation, Mr.

10 Walker.

11 So, Ginny, it's yours.

12 MS. LONGO: If you will just hang on a second 13 here?

14 MR. BERSON: This might be --

15 MS. LONGO: -stated, when he was asked 16 about the affidavi t and the affidavit says that 17 l aid thatj nd had reported that ol on* and*

18 they smelled alcoh 19 says, like I said,

  • Riaid they came to him and 20 said they wouldn't work for him. That they thought 21 he'd been drinking and was a drunk problem." Not 22 that "he was a dru:nk." "He had been drinking."

COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

104 1 MR. ROGOFF: Did I hear you to read, quote, "he 2 then drinking"? I may have misheard.

3 MS. LONGO: He -- I'm sorry, "He'd been 4 drinking."

5 MR. BERSON: "He'd been drinking."

6 MS. LONGO: "He had been drinking."

7 MR. COUTU: And did you establish what they 8 meant by that? He had been drinking on the job? He

9. had been drinking the night before?

10 MS. LONGO: Well, I think since these people 11 were on the job, since n was on the job, and 12 ere on the job and they reported on wan' 13 the job that they thought had been drinking, 14 what does it matter whether he was drinking on-site, 15 or just before, or the night before? If they thought 16 he was clearly, you know, showed signs of being 17 drunk?

18 MR. COUTU: I didn't hear that in your 19 statement.

20 MS. LONGO: Well, why did they think he'd been 21 drinking unless he was -- clearly showed some signs 22 of having been drinking? Something was wrong.

COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

1 MR. ROGOFF: I think it was because there we 2 MS. LONGO: Is that not to you an indicatior 3 that somebody might be impaired? Is that not a 4 report of a fitness for duty problem?

5 MR. ROGOFF: I think it was 6 regular behavior to drink. I mean nobody doubts 7 that. You know, our belief and our conclusion wa 8 that it was confined to after hours, so that when 9 somebody says "he had been drinking," there wasn' 10 any -- there's no news in that statement just in 11 of itself. Unless one can establish, I think, is 12 what Mr. Coutu is asking, that they're --

13 MS. LONGO: Well, if mister --

14 MR. COUTU: I guess in reality, its irreleva 15 Its irrelevant in that we did not have that same 16 statement in our investigation. So, we if we agr 17 today that you probably have some information or 18 have had some information or different statements 19 than what we received, I think it's wrong for eit 20 of Us to infer what it meant. But it is a statem 21 that we obviously don't have in our investigation 22 MR. DYER: Let me back up. Let me ask a COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

106 1 question here, I think, and redirect this a little 2 bit. You know, the violation we're looking about 3 doesn't go todrinking problem. It 4 goes to what did know, or what was he 5 told? And I think that what we're telling you is 6 that we have independent information that says that 7 -cknowledges being told by the two 8 individuals, regardless of their motives, that, the 9 way we understood it, thatL was -- had a 10 fitness for duty problem. You know, whether he is a 11 drunk, drinking, whatever it was, if an employee 12 comes to their supervisor and makes this, "I don't 13 want to work for a drunk," and, you.know, is that the 14 type that you want to make an distinction as to 15 whether he's drinking after work and he's hung over 16 in the morning? or, you know, does that raise enough 17 of a concern to cause a for-cause fitness for duty 18 test? That's-sort of where we are, and what didM 19 know? So, I don't want to get into whether 20 or not-mister -- the history of-21 drinking. It's a question of what did 22 know? And if you -- you know, what was your basis COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

107 1 for making your investigation?

2 It's obvious our investigation has 3 different conclusions than yours did, and I think 4 Ginny. And we've shared with you that going to 5 independent third parties who were relating 6 conversations, other conversations of 7 would indicate that these individuals had come to 8 him, regardless of the motives, and provided some 9 sort of an accusation that he wasn't fit for duty, 10 that w wasn't fit for duty. So if 1.1 there's a questions -'if you have something on that, 12 we don't need to get into the debate, did he have a 13 drinking problem or anything else like that. It's 14 more directed as to what did know?

15 MR. ROGOFF: Randy,. could I ask you if you had 16 what you believed to be credible evidence that the 17 individuals had gone to'and 18 had st.ated something that you believed that to be 19 credible, had come to him and said that he had been 20 drinking, with the inference or the direct statement 21 of on the job, or was impaired on the job, would your 22 decision have been different with respect to COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

... ....- f n n Att.7 1 nT TT.. (630) 653-1622

108 2 MR. CLEVELAND: Absolutely. Yes.

3 And the focus was exactly -- that's an 4 excellent point that you made. The focus of our 5 investigation, we were trying to determine whether 6 anyone had come to Vwith specific 7 articulable,, actionable observations regarding 8 81fitness. You really, in a case like 9 this, you can't entirely pull it away from the 10 context of what was known about"O 13 Clearly, cknowledged tha' as 12 known as a, quote-unquote, "drinker," but based on 13 his personal behavior observation, he did not have a 14 basis for initiating a test or taking further action.

15 Now, he was counseled by NMC on making 16 a more conservative decision with respect to what he 17 considered the imperceptible faint odor, but in terms 18 of people coming to him with a specific concern 19 regarding fitness --

20 MR. ROGOFF: Randy, if you would speak more 21 directly to Mr. Dyer's question with respect to the 22 credibility, the conclusion you drew with respect to COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

.... *Yr PC r n VN TT. (f;1AV) 653-1622

109 1 the credibility of the individuals who stated that 2 they went to Because I think the 3 gravamen of the concern has been perfectly expressed 4 here, and we've been through this hour upon hour upon 5 hour, by Mr. Dyer and that is how we came to the 6 conclusion that it was not credible that the 7 individuals had gone to 8 MR. CLEVELAND: Ultimately, what we concluded 9 about was he didn't go to supervision. He 10 was on record with this, he did not go anywhere with 11 the odor of alcohol. He didn't indicate in the 12 initial interviews that there was any other concerns 13 that he had gone.

14 MR. WALKER: If I may? January 15th I had two 15 conversations wit based upon conversations 16 from . This was a telephone call with him 17 down south. He's in the7N 18 Local. What he told me was that regarding the smell 19 of alcohol, it wasn't just limited to a smell of 20 alcohol, as Miss Longo suggests, was an FFD issue.

21 This was directly related to what they were telling 22 me about the smell of alcohol. He said at this time.

COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

'L7ýM n TPWT M.~i\ TT.. (lO') 653-1622

110 1 while working inside the protected area, two people 2 occasionally smelled of alcohol. He identified the 3' two individuals who smelled of alcohol as both*,

4 and This is the first time 5 anybody suggested thatl 5smelled of alcohol 6 at any point in time. It was never corroborated in 7 any of my other interviews.

.8 as asked if he reported the 9 smelled of alcohol to his immediate supervision? I 10 don't think we can ignore this on two occasions.- He 11 said he did not report his concerns. So, I asked him 12 specifically, "What did do you? I want to know what 13 you did with it?" He said he didn't report *his 14 concerns because then, he said, "Look at it from my 15 point of view," and then he talked about being*

16 I think we're all aware in this room what 17 bein3.ng tin a union. He says, "Look at it 18 from my point of view. I'm working out of a union 19 hall," which 20 21 22 J He said he didn't want COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

NoN ;. CoCNTY FARM RD.. WHEATON. IL. (630) 653-1622

il 1 to create waves, so he kept his eyes open and his 2 mouth shut.

3 Now, when he talked -- he talked to me 4 a little bit more, he talked about he wanted to --

5 he iýtalked about going to the employee 6 concerns, or wanting to go to employee concerns. So 7 looking at my notes, I hadn't really went into that 8 in-depth so I called him back at 7:55 p.m. Now, I 9 had to call one place, they had to go get him and 10 bring him back so he could talk to me on the phone, 11 so this was a -- there was a -- it wasn't an 12 immediate, there was a lot of deliberate thought 13 there. I asked him what he meant about what he said 14 earlier and he again reiterated to me that he did not 15 tell anyone of the smell of alcohol. So he had an 16 opportunity to tell me about that. He didn't on two 17 occasions in that same day.

18 MR. COUTU: And later claimed that he did. Or 19 was one of the twoparties that did. In much the 20 same way that we got conflicting statements from Mr.

21 So, we have an issue here which is, if you 22 take anyone's statement made by an individual, you COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

-.iTrvvrrM%7vD y WWN TON. IL. (630) 653-1622

112 1 can support a conclusion. If you look at all of the 2 statements made by the individuals and you look at 3 our initial assertion that four of the five people 4 said they did not report, it, they did not report, 5 okay? The/fthjone gave a series of conflicting 6 statements and uncorroborated evidence who happened 7 to be the other individual that allegedly went too 8 *We had to form an opinion on whether or not 9 these people really did report, and our conclusion 10 was they did not.

11 We could take any one statement. We 12 could take the statement, you know, the initial 13 statements of individuals and then discount the other 14 ones. We had to take all of the information, come to 15 a reasonable conclusion about whether or not we had 16 impairment on the job and in fact the individuals did 17 report that. Our conclusion was, from the 18 information that we had, that that didn't happen.

19 We clearly admit, we believe that*

,jN-J 20 .__ had a drinking problem. Did it manifest 21 itself as impairment on the job or fitness for duty 22 on the job? We were unable to find any information, COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

600 S. COUNTY FARM RD., WHEATON, IL. (630) 653-1622

113 1 exclusive of these statements, which were in conflict 2 with other statements that there were cases of 3 impairment on the job by multiple sources, so we made 4 a reasonable judgment regarding whether or not those 5 reports were in fact made.

6 As it turns out there's a whole lot 7 more information on this affidavit. Ce of.

8 individuals has since . . .. We're 9 not going into motives for that, but there -- there 10 is -- there's a great deal going on here.

11 MS. PEDERSON: Are there any further questions 12 from the NRC on this?

13 MS. LONGO: Okay, no further questions. And I 14 thank you for, .you know, going through the details of 15 what you did and what you have.

16 MR. WEIL: I do.

17 MS. LONGO: Okay, thank you.

18 MS. PEDERSON: Chuck?

i9 MR. WEIL: Mr. Walker, just a few short 20 questions.

21 In your interviews as a professional 22 investigator do you normally share your interview COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

114 1 notes with the person you interview?

2 MR. WALKER: Do you mean the results of their 3 interview?

4 MR. WEIL: No, your actual interview notes? The 5 notes you take during the interview.

6 MR. WALKER: No.

7 MR. WEIL: I notice in the interview of*

8 ;that you had him read your actual interview 9 notes and initial them and date them. Could you 10 please explain why you did that, sir?

11 MR. WALKER: Yes, I will. Because initially 12 when I spoke to -on the 5th, I believe, of 13 December, I had I asked him the question, which I 14 have already told you folks, I asked him about 15 fitness for duty, and was there any -- I can read it 16 again, but it's about fitness for duty. He said 17 there was none.

18 Then I went and I interpret -- I then 19 intervveewd- who told me that--

20 of the issue and said that, when I asked him why he 21 didn't tell anybody or report it, he said, "Well, the 22 supervisors all know it." Which caused me to go back COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

115 1 t *and go in-depth into the interview 2 with him again. I wanted to determine if in fact he 3 did have any smell of alcohol. And throughout that, 4 1 had him look at the previous notes, Chuck, Mr.

5 Weil, and look at it and then at the conclusion of it 6 I had him write down in his own hand why he didn't --

7 or why he arrived at the conclusion that he did, that 8 it didn't need to be reported, which was the 9 five-hours. And I thought it was important, because 10 of my own intent to get to *the bottom of it, to have 12 his, as the note implicated, in the notes for him to 12 say whatever is accurate, what wasn't accurate, and 13 write down why he didn't report it. That was the 14 one -- I hardly ever do that, but it was significant 15 enough for me to make sure that you, the reader, got 16 an opportunity to see what he was saying to me.

17 That's why I did it in this case.

18 MR. WEIL: Thank you. It just stood out and I 19 wanted to --

20 MR. WALKER: And I wanted it to stand out 21 because what's differentiating at that time was that 22 he was making the determination, not that he didn't COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

rnAA *q ('flIN7TY PARm PT-):. WRRATON~. TT,. (61n) ~~12

116 1 smell, but that the smell -- he was making a 2 determination himself as to where that fit in this 3 five-hour rule himself. I thought that it was 4 significant.

5 MR. WEIL: Thank you very much.

6 MS. PEDERSON: Other questions?

7 MR. CRAFT: Can I make one --

8 MS. PEDERSON: Mr. Craft? Sure.-.

9 MR. CRAFT: One comment for the what-it's-worth 10 department. I don't know if it matters or if it 11 doesn't matter, but I sat down with 12 and based on my former career and my former life, 31 13 years, I went at him very, very hard, as hard as I've 14 gone after any homicide suspect, and I pressed him 15 very, very hard, and I called him a liar. And I'll 16 never get invited to his family picnic, but that 17 wasn't my purpose. I wanted to know, as an 18 investigator, is he lying? Now, I'm a former 19 polygraph examiner, not that that matters, but if you 20 talk to a thousand liars, you know what a liar sounds 21 like. You know what a truthful person is. And I 22 squeezed, I went after him very, very hard and he COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

rt-ITnThmV VBPM Pn WRATOnm. TT,. (630) 653-1622

117 1 swore to me that he was telling the truth, that they 2 never came to him, other than that comment that they 3 didn't want to work for a drunk.

4 MR. COUTU: How long did that interview take?

5 MR. CRAFT: About three hours. And I didn't let 6 up. Three hours in a room, I mean, that -- that's 7 where I used to make my money with the FBI. They 8 sent me all over the world to do interrogations, and 9 I went at him very, very hard.

10 MR. WEIL: At least this part of the table 11 appreciates an examiner.

12 MR. CRAFT: Well, you know what I'm talking 13 about.

14 MR. WEIL: Yes, sir.

15 MS. LONGO: This is Ginny Longo. I just wanted 16 to, for what it's worth, I've done investigative work 17 too, and I can appreciate the difficulties. And I 18 have dealt with psychopaths and, you know, people 19 accused of murder and embezzlement and all kinds of 20 bad things, and so I understand, you know, what 21 you're dealing with. You know, it's not easy.

22 Thanks.

COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

118 1 MR. COUTU: One last question, and I think this 2 is a really important question. Does anybody have 3 any reason to believe, because still has 4 an unescorted access to our facility, does anybody 5 have any reason to believe at this point in time that 6 he should not have unescorted access to our facility 7 or to any other nuclear facilities? Because that's 8 very important. We've been asking this, essentially 9 from the time we were notified of this predecisional 10 enforcement conference. We take this very seriously.

11 If there is a belief that this individual does not 12 belong working at a nuclear facility then we need to 13 know that. And we've been told no, there is not a 14 safety concern at this point. Has that changed?

15 MR. DYER: Tom, let me just answer that right 16 away. I understand.

17 If you will look at our enforcement 18 manual, I think it's Section 7.5, it talks about what 19 we do when we get a preliminary call on a willful 20 violation, and as part of our process we review that 21 and make a decision. We have in the past, we will in 22 the future make calls and say, until this is COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

0-1p^TýT¶M1 r1ThT"n?.flT~ WT.7tOt7 jP(TT TT Ic .r% Cc r, . i

119

  • -/ 1 resolved, we have to pull somebody. And we made that 2 decision and said at this time, based on what we 3 know, we don't see that. We'll review the 4 information we've gotten today and reconfirm our 5 previous conclusion, but no. It's spelled out, our 6 process, and in the enforcement manual, and we are 7 following it.

8 MR. COUTU: But no changes at this time.

9 MR. DYER: No changes, yes, sir.

10 MS. PEDERSON: No changes.

11 MR. COUTU: Thank you.

Ks' 12 MR. ROGOFF: Would you like us to provide 13 copies -- yes, we shall provide copies of Mr. Craft's 14 notes and a copy of the document as marked up in the 15 affidavit of 16 MS. PEDERSON: Yes. Thank you.

17 Any other statements or questions at 18 this time before we take a short recess?

19 MS. LONGO: Nothing here. Thank you.

20 MS. PEDERSON: Ginny, we're going to take a 21 short recess. We would like to include you folks.

22 Do you have a conference room that we can call you COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

120 1 at? And what number would that be?

2 MS. LONGO: Other than the one you're at?

3 (Whereupon, a brief recess 4 was taken.)

5 MS. PEDERSON: Okay, let's go back on the 6 record.

7 Thank you for rejoining us. We have a 8 couple of things, it's going to deviate a little bit 9 from standard practice. We want to circle back on 10 the specific apparent violation and get your reaction 1i to that. Secondly, for your benefit, we will have 12 Ms. Longo summarize what we see to be the additional 13 information. And then we will go into our 14 enforcement policy and process, and then Jim Dyer 15 will give his closing remarks.

16 Terry,, do you want to review the 17 apparent violation, please?

18 MR. MADEDA: I thought we wanted to go over the 19 question first.

20 MS. PEDERSON: Yeah, the question as it relates 21 to --

22 MR. MADEDA: Okay, I guess this is a question to COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

121 1 Randy Cleveland. Does your FFD program require 2 reporting the odor of alcohol?

3 MR. CLEVELAND: Yes.

4 MR. MADEDA: Is there any exceptions on the 5 contrary when that would not be required?

6 MR. CLEVELAND: No.

7 MR. MADEDA: So, it would be all-inclusive?

8 MR. CLEVELAND: Yes.

9 MR. MADEDA: Thank you.

10 MR. DYER: Let me ask that another, and we will ii review it, but is it just the odor? Is it if 12 somebody -- fitness for duty? What triggers it?

13 MR. CLEVELAND: Our fitness for duty program 14 requires the reporting of any FFD concern, and we 15 provide a number of behavioral examples that you can 16 break into physical indicators, social, performance 17 related. Certainly anything along the lines of smell 18 of alcohol, unsteady gait, slurred speech, that is 19 all referenced as a basis for developing a concern on 20 fitness, and the expectation would be that that would 21 be reported.

22 MR. DYER: Okay. If it's somebody just asked, COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

1 2

3 4

5 6

7 8

9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

123 1 they could corroborate any FFD concern, as we define 2 it in our program again, looking for some of these 3 indicators that we give, odor of alcohol, unsteady 4 gait, slurred speech, bloodshot eyes, et cetera, and 5 then act on that. If they're not able to corroborate 6 that, it's a data point and we move on. It's not an 7 automatic trigger for conducting a for-cause test.

8 MR. BERSON: If we go back and they said, "Randy 9 Cleveland smells of alcohol," clearly smells of 10 alcohol.

11 MR. CLEVELAND: Then yes, that is actionable, 12 and that's a very good point. That's why we're 13 focusing our investigative efforts on trying to 14 determine whether we had that. An actionable 15 observation.

16 MR. BERSON: Okay.

17 MS; PEDERSON: And one further clarification on 18 that. If a supervisor, such as 19 personally detected even a faint odor of alcohol, 20 would that trigger a for-cause test by your program?

21 MR. CLEVELAND: Yes.

22 MS. PEDERSON: Thank you.

COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

124 1 MR. CLEVELAND: And that's where we did do 2 the -- counseled ton conservative decision 3 making with respect to this program, and we expect in 4 the future that that be initiated.

5 MS. PEDERSON: At this point, I would ask Ginny 6 to summarize the additional information. That does 7 seem to be a rather crucial part of this case.

8 Ginny?

9 MS. LONGO: Okay, the -- there are three pieces 10 of additional information we wanted to make sure you 11 understand that we have and that are important. The' 12 first is testimony that in, I guess it 13 was July or August of 2001, whatever the time period 14 was, came into the trailer where 15 ,was seated and as seated, and*.

16 ,NIE said, a meaning and 17 1, "they ain't going to work for an,"

18 expl-etive deleted, "drunk like

  • unquote.

19 The second piece of information is 20 that testified under oath also that in 21 December of 2001, the date is not specified, but it 22 was December 2001, told -- or, I'm COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

125 1 sorry, in December of 2001,.to0 2 that a couple of guys had come up to him and said 3 that ither had alcohol on his breath or 4 was drunk. And this is in reference to, again, the 5 event in July, August, 2001.

6 And then the third piece of 7 information is sworn testimony when he 8 was questioned about this affidavit that was never 9 signed and the statement in the affidavit which says 10 tha *informe* ",Nilithat

  • -- I'm 11 sorry, I lost my thought. I'm going to have to start 12 that sentence over again. When, in response to -- or 13 inreference to the unsigned affidavit which claims 14 the told jhat he was informed that, by
15 and that they smelled alcohol on 16 .said, "Well, that's not wha1f*

17 said to me. What he said to me was that 18 and S said that they didn't want to work for S19 - because he had been drinking and he was a 20 drunk."

21 MS. PEDERSON: Thank you, 22 Any clarifying questions on that, Tom?

COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

1 2

3 4

5 6

7 8

9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

127 1 MR. WEIL: Okay. What I just want to cover is 2 where we go from here.

3 First of all I want to emphasize the 4 apparent Violations that were described earlier today 5 are subject to change based on out deliberations from 6 today's meeting. Usually, we like to get our 7 enforcement actions out in four to six weeks, but in 8 complicated cases like this one is beginning to show, 9 it's obviously go to take longer. A data point that 10 I will also give you is that we are having an 11 individual conference with -. excuse, 12 me, at *request, I believe it's August 13 5th, so we will also be taking his information into 14 consideration so we have more homework to do later on 15 next month, so we have to give all that consideration 16 too. So, basically, after all the information is in, 17 the Region, along with the Office of Enforcement and 18 Office of General Counsel and the Program offices, we 19 will all get together, review the information, review 20 it, caucus, come up with the Agency's position.

21 Once the agency's position is arrived 22 at, one of the senior managers in the Region will COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

128 1 call you and give you the Agency's position and, of 2 course, tell you what it is.

3 Possibilities are, obviously, one is 4 no action; another would simply be a notice of 5 violation; another would be a notice of violation 6 with a proposed imposition of a civil penalty; or a 7 fourth would be, possibly, some sort of an order.

8 If an order or a civil penalty is 9 proposed, we would also be making a press release.

10 The action, if it's any sort of 11 significant action, would also be faxed to you ahead 12 of time so that you had an opportunity to review it 13 so that you would be able to comment on the action 14 should you need to.

15 Instructions for responding to the 16 notice of violation if there is one issued will be 17 contained in the notice of violation. The options, 18 of course, would be to accept the violatioh. If a 19 civil penalty would be proposed, also accept the 20 violation and civil penalty.

21 The other option of course would be to 22 deny the violation and pay the civil penalty.

COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

129 1 The fourth option would be to deny the 2 violation and deny the civil penalty should be 3

4 5

6 7

8 9

10 Ii 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 I really want to emphasize that this 19 is predecisional at this point. No decisions have 20 been made going into this meeting, and.we have one 21 more conference to go before we collect everything we 22 probably need to collect.

COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

130 1 I do have a question, and that is:

2 The information given today, is there anything that 3 we should know about that's either proprietary or of 4 a personal privacy nature that we need to restrict?

5 MR. ROGOFF: Other than the document that was 6 referred to and read from, that comes from the 7 personnel file of .A- _

8 MR. CLEVELAND: You mean 9 MR. ROGOFF: I'm sorry.

10 Everybody's made slips, and I've probably made more 11 than my fair share. But I think that's the only one.

12 MS. PEDERSON: Could I ask a little more 13 specifically so I understand that remark? We talked 14 about returning the chart to you because you could 15 crosswalk-that to your larger handout. Is there 16 anything in your handout, the bound handout, that you 17 would consider withholdable under 2.790 of the 18 Privacy Act?

19 MR. ROGOFF: We specifically left names out of 20 here.

21 MS. PEDERSON: Right.

22 MR. ROGOFF: And we did that so that no one COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

1 2

3 4

5 6

7 8

9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

132 1 Is there any questions I can answer 2 for you on the NRC enforcement policy?

3 MR. COUTU: No, sir.

4 MR. WEIL: Mr. Dyer?

5 MR. DYER: Thank you.

6 My closing remarks are somewhat built 7 on Chuck's summary of where we go from-here. I think 8 you've heard from Ms. Longo that, you know, right now 9 we have additional information, we just provided it 10 to you, that says that -- that sort of explains why 11 we're at different conclusions. So anything you can 12 do to reconcile that or clarify or adjust your, you 13 know, position, the goal of this meeting, and again 14 the predecisional enforcement conference, what Chuck 15 said, this is still part of our proposed enforcement 16 development process and that, and so between now and 17 the time when we finally come to our conclusion, 18 which will be some time after we hold the individual 19 conference, you know, any information that you can 20 submit to us that will clarify or reconcile why and 21 where we're different is welcome.. And right now, you 22 know, we're taking a look at, you know, trying to COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

133 1 come to a conclusion and review it as a part of, you 2 know, what's the quality of the evidence and the 3 basis for the weighting the credibility that we give 4 to the information that we have. Obviously, you 5 know, more credibility to things like sworn 6 statements and independent or uninvolved parties' 7 carry more weight with us than the individuals who 8 may have a motive in providing their side of the 9 story.

10 And so that's where we're-headed and I 11 just want to reiterate some of the questions -- the

12. point I made before is, you know, we're not really 13 dealing with whether was in fact 14 drinking that day. The question comes down to was it 15 reported that he was? And did take the 16 appropriate actions? iis not the 17 violation, if you would, today. The question has to 18 do with did- properly implement your 19 fitness for duty process? And so the question is was 20 he knowledgeable? Did somebody present him the 21 information? And we have to come to a final 22 conclusion on that.

COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

134 1 I think you heard pretty much where we 2 are today and where we're going and, you know, we'll 3 take the information that you provided and reconcile 4 it with what we already know.

5 I thank you for coming and any 6 information you can give, again, any information you 7 can give us between now and the time we reach our 8 final conclusion is -- would be helpful. Thank you.

9 MR. WEIL: If I could tack on for a moment?

10 There's also the other Violation, potential 11 violation, I should say, that!s the potential for 12 false information provided by., . not only 13 us, but also Mr. Walker during his investigation. So 14 that's out there also.

15 MR. COUTU: I don't know that we're clear on 16 exactly what. the apparent violations are. Can we 17 actually read the apparent violations?

18 MR. WEIL: Okay. There's two. One is in July 19 of 2001, and potentially the last two weeks is 20 probably the best we can cover it, in your owner-21 controlled area, in the Day & Zimmerman fabrication 22 shop, three individuals, these three welders we've COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

135 1 been talking about, provided with the 2 fitness for duty information, and then.

3 took no action upon that in violation of your FFD 4 policy.

5 Then, secondly, is the incomplete and 6 inaccurate information issue that, and I've -- I 7 don't have the dates off the top of my head, but the 8 dates Mr. Walker interviewed and the 9 dates that Special Agent Fahey interviewed*.i 10 that provided incomplete and 11 inaccurate information to the investigators and 12 that's about -- and his knowledge of what occurred 13 after July 2001, the fitness review.

14 MS. PEDERSON: Those are summarized in the third 15 paragraph of our June 9th letter.

16 MR. DYER: Any other questions?

17 MR. COUTU.: Well, we appreciate the opportunity 18 to come here and present what we uncovered in our 19 investigation. I guess the one thing I would ask is 20 that we look at all of the information provided by 21 all of the individuals to understand the credibility, 22 potential truthfulness or lack of truthfulness, and COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

136 1 the time line at which those statements occurred to 2 really understand whether or not you think@.

3 in fact received the information at. the time 4 that you believe the violation occurred. And that we 5 will see if there's anything we can do to clarify 6 that when we leave here to see if there's more 7 information we can give you, or if we can pull it 8 together in a different manner, whatever we need to 9 do.

10 Thank you. It was a good, open 1i exchange of information, almost like an accrediting 12 board, the questions weren't intended to be hostile, 13 but they may appear to be so. I thought it was a 14 good exchange of information; Thanks for the 15 opportunity.

16 MS. PEDERSON: Thank you. That concludes the 17 meeting.

18 19 (Which were all the proceedings 20 had at the hearing of the 21 above-entitled cause.)

22 COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

137 1 STATE OF ILLINOIS )

2 SS 3 COUNTY OF DU PAGE )

4 5

6 I, JEFFREY D. STUPAK, C.S.R. No. 084-4188, a 7 Notary Public duly qualified and commissioned for the 8 State of Illinois, County of DuPage, do hereby 9 certify that I reported in shorthand the testimony 10 taken at the hearing of the above-entitled cause, and Ii that the foregoing transcript is a true, correct and 12 complete report of the testimony so taken at the time 13 and place hereinabove set forth.

14 15 16 17 18 19 JEFFREY D. STUPAK 20 21 My Commission Expires:

JEFFREY DSTUPAK NOTAt PUBLIC, STATE OF ILLINOIS 22 April 23, 2005 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES APR. 23, 2005 COUNTY COURT REPORTERS, INC.

'023] 6:13 7:3- 5 128:13 22 23:10 25:15 33:9 34:9-59:

102 (3] 66:13 67:3-4 Above-entitled [2] 136: Agency (1] 12:10 9,14 84:7 102:9-10 110:1

'drinking, [1] 102:13 21 137:10 Agency's [3] 127:20-21 134:21 Absolutely [1] 108:2 128:1 [4] 2:13 6:6 72:1

'These (1] 60:7 Accept [2) 128:18-19 Agenda [2] 3:18 7:1 [2] 55:17 93:11

'they (1) 56:13 Acceptable [1] 9:11 Agent [2] 25:21 135:9 [1] 44:8

'was [1] 102:14 Acceptance Il] 131:22 Ago [1] 100:5 Arrived [2] 115:7 127:21 0

Access [30] 2:16 5:20 8: Agree [2] 105:16 129:9 Articulable [2] 108:7 084-004188 [1] 1:12 122:16 6 9:22 17:2 20:5 23:16 Ahead [3] 33:3 72:3 128:

084-4188 (1] 137:6 Articulated [1] 28:15 28:22 31:16 44:22 45:11, 11 I 14,18 46:10 47:6,14,18- Ain't [4] 54:1 56:13 60: Ascertain [1] 18:10 1 [2] 27:12 61:12 19 63:13 68:13 70:1-2,7, 8 124:17 Aspect [1] 41:10 11 [5] 22:3,9,21 83:20 20 71:5,7 95:3 102:9 118: Al 1]22:13 Asserted [2] 26:19-20 llth [4] 85:11,18 86:4,15 4,6 1) 109:17 Assertion [1] 112:3 12 [2] 23:4 24:19 Accordance [1] 18:11 101:12 103:7,17 Assessment [7) 30:16,19 13 [1] 96:2 According [1] 97:5 104:12 124:16 125:15,17 31:15 32:18-19 33:7 37:17 15 [1] 92:20 Accountable [1] 50:7 Alcohol [106] 16:11,16, Assessments [1] 6:11 15th [1] 109:14 Accrediting [1] 136:11. 19 17:4 18:5,9,15,18 19: Assign [1] 37:4 16 [1] 1:6 Accuracy (11 67:14 14,17-18,21 20:3,15 21:2, Associated [2] 58:5,8 17 [3] 58:7 72:7 Accurate [8] 3:8 64:12 4 22:19 25:1,8,14 28:17, Asterisk (1] 37:3 17th [1] 72:7 90:21 91:4-5 115:12 131: 20 29:2,4 41:7 45:4,7,16 Atomic [2] 129:14,16 1985 [1] 77:8 16 46:3,15 48:13'17 49:4 52:

Accurately [1] 64:7 2 53:13 54:15 55:3,11,21 Attachment [1] 131:9 2 Attention [4] 15:14 31:

Accusation [1] 107:9 56:20 57:5,9,12 58:11-12 2.790 [(] 130:17 59:10-11,14,16 60:2,9-10, 21 97:1 98:4 Accused [1] 117:19 2001 [44] 23:19 24:12 25: 22 62:16 67:11,15 70:12 Attitude [2] 99:15 18 26:16 27:2,19,21 28:9 Acknowledge [2] 7:16 62:

72:20 73:1,3,6,22 74:18 August [16] 58:19 72:22 30:16 31:6,15 32:4,8,13 11 76:2,5,18 77:7,14 79:20 74:15,20 77:9 78:6 79:11 33:14,17 37:12 38:19 58: Acknowledged [5] 22:20 80:1 85:3,5 87:19 88:1 81:19 82:18 86:1 101:3 19 70:17 72:8,12,22 74: 24:2,8 25:12 108:11 89:12,14 90:17 91:21 92: 124:13 125:5 127:12 15,20 76:6 77:9 79:1-2,7, Acknowledges [1] 106:7 10 96:19 97:10,14,20 98: Authorization [8] 2:16 14,16,19 81:20 99:7 101: Acknowledging [1] 45:13 2,11 99:2,11 103:18 109: 9:22 44:22 45:11,18 47:6, 15 124:13,21-22 125:1,5 Act [7] 13:17 16:21 18: 11,19-20,22 110:2-3,5,9 14,20 134.:19 135:13 11 36:4 45:8 123:5 130:18 111:15 115:3 121:2,18 Automatic [2] 51:14 123:

2002 [20] 16:5 22:3,9,12, Acted [2] 35:14 48:19 123:3,9-10,19 125:3,15 7 21 23:4 32:13 38:17 40:1 Action (18] 9:9 30:3 38: Aldo '[6] 2:14 5:22 13:13 Available [2] 26:13 51:

65:18 66:16 67:20 69:14- 7 39:19 46:7 47:20 48:7- 29:10 44:19 74:3 20 15 70:3 72:13-14 79:8 8,20 49:17 68:20 94:4 All-inclusive [1] 121:7 Average [1] 34:14 101:6 108:14 128:4,10-11,13 Allegation [8] 14:1.10 2003 [4] 1:6 37:18 51:8 Aware [20] 5:9 16:20 20:

135:3 15:13,17 17:22 18:18 52:

71:20 19 49:10 57:15,18 58:17-Actionable [5] 56:1 76: 1 68:11 18 59:1,12 60:3 65:4,7 2005 [1] 137:22 20 108:7 123:11,14 Allegations [2] 27:18 70:19 84:6 89:19 93:2,18 23 [1] 137:22 Actions [20] 7:19 11:4, 78:1 100:16 110:16 26 [2] 28:9 99:21 6 13:18 14:17 19:2 29:13 Alleged [4) 67:8 96:12, Awful [1] 34:13 26th [1] 27:2 35:22 36:3 40:16,21 41: 14 97:17 27 [2] 22:5,12 15,17 42:3 44:18,22 45:8 Allegedly [4] 36:4 82:

69:6 127:7 133:16 15-16 112:7 Background [13 25:4 27th [2] 91:9 100:4 Activity [1] 42:9 Alleges [1] 22:18 Bad [5] 64:16 75:16 93:8 3

Actual [2] 114:4,8 97:6 117:20 30th [1] 69:15 Alleging [3] 24:21 66:

49:8 83:12-13 Bad-mouthing [1] 93:8 31 [3] 25:20 38:17 116:12 Add [4] 17 71:12 Balance [1] 98:5 102:22 Allow [1] 57:17 34 [2) 96:1-2 Balances [1] 122:14 Addition [2] 9:7 91:10 Almost [3] 91:20 97:15 4 Barriers [7] 38:5,14 39:

Additional [18] 6:16,21 136:11 400 [1] 110:19 17:11 18:10 19:8 26:6,11 6,17 40:9 41:1 42:5 Ample- [1] 100:6 5 40:19 62:3 68:13 69:5 83: Based [24] 10:16,19 14:

Analysis [2] 122:7 129:8 5 [1] 2:3 1 102:22 120:12 124:6,10 Answer [8] 55-6 58:20 68: 22 15:1,5 19:21 21:5 28:

5th [2] 114:12 127:13 126:3 132:9 14,20 29:7 30:13 37:7 52:

9 72:5 90:1 101:19 118:

7 Address [8] 8:3 29:12 15 132:1 4 54:9-10 92:15 97:20 98:

7 [1] 69:14 30:3 35:3 41:16 44:19 57: 13 99:14 108:12 109:15 Answered [2] 75:11,14 17 66:8 116:12 119:2 127:5 7.5 [1] 118:18 Anyway [3] 69:7 72:15 89:

Addressed [4] 35:10 46: Baseline [1] 35.:19 7/30 [1] 99:7 21 4 78:16 99:17 Basis [9] 21:1 30:5 31:7 7.00 [1] 96:17 Apartment [5] 82:2-3,11, Adequately [2] 19:22 99: 48:19 69:17 106:22 108:

7-55 [1] 111:8 15 90:19 17 14 121:19 133:3 8 Apparent [8] 3:6 7:7,17

  • 1Adjust [1] 132:12 120:10,17 127:4 134:16-17 Bay [2] 49:19 110:19 8 [3] 16:5 40:1 69:18 Administrator [2] 1:17 Beach [15] 8:6 30:20 31:

801 [1] 1:11 Appeal [1] 129:14 3:22 7 39:2-3 40:6 42:17 43:

8:00 [1] 83:21 Appear [2] 96:19 136:13 Admission [21 65:11 74: 11,13,16 44:5,14 46:10, 8:30 [1] 92:6 Appeared [5] 23:7,9 41: 17 84:21 21 4,7 59:16 Become [1] 70:19 9 Admissions [1] 86:12 Applies [1] 45:19 9:00 [2] 1:6 92:6 Admit [1] 112:19 Bed [3] 91:22 92:6,8 Applying [1] 49:7 Beforehand [2] 31:18 32:

9:30 [I] 92:7 Admits [3] 25:7 67:9 83:6 Appreciate [4] 7:22 12: 22 9th [4] 8:2 96:16 135:15 Admitted [5] 24:22 54:

2 117:17 135:17 Began [1] 68:14 A 19 56:17 64:22 76:14 Appreciates [1] 117:11 A.M. [1] 1:6 Admittedly [1] 100:22 Begin [3] 9:20 20:6 Appreciation [1] 50:17 aility [1] 63:13 Advice [1) 98:21 Beginning [4] 37:14 68:

Appropriate [5) 97:2,4 10,21 127:8 Affairs [3] 2:13 6:5-6 A' [14] 20:6,14 25:7

  • ",'* 63:20 67:11 70:4,6 Affidavit [12] 68:15 91:

3 100:3,12 101:5 103:16 122:21 126:8 133:16 Appropriately [1] 49:11 Begins [1] 12:5 Behavior [4] 97:1 105:6 91:1 99:16 109:9,15 110: April [1] 137:22 A 111. 113:7 119:15 125:8-9,13 108:13 122:22

15 121:15 127:8 16 44:20 46:8,12,14,19, Concluded [9] 7:2 18:2, Behaviors [2] 76:17 77:3 Categories (1] 34:13 22 47:7,10,13,18,22 48:2, 4,6 19:19 28:13 52:8 68:

Belief (3] 99:14 105:7 Category (1] 33:20 6,9,13,15 51:1,4, 6,8,13, 12 109:8 118:11 Caucus [1] 127:20 19 53:2,5-6,9,11,14,19 Concludes (1] 136:16 Belong [1] 118:12 54:5,13,22 55:13 56:3,8 Conclusion [22] 11:1 14:

Caused (2] 92:11 114:22 62:14 66:7,9,14 67:2,4,7, 18 19:12,21 28:18 30:6 Benchmark [1] 33:8 Causes [1] 7:10 19 68:8 69:7,11,21 70:2, 42:10 105:7 108:22 109:6 Benefit (1] 120:11 Causing (2] 73:15 96:15 6,9,15,17,21 71:4,10,19 112:1,9,15,17 115:5,7 Berson (21] 1:19 4:2 27: Central E1] 29:22 75:17 76:8,12 79:4 81:14 3,10 28:7,10 44:1,10,16 119:5 131:17 132:17 133:

Certain (6] 15:16 41:20 82:7,10,13,18 83:12 98:5, 50:21 51:2,5,7 70:18 71: 1,22 134:8 44:4 52:14 54:14,16 19 101:5 108:2 109:8 121:

1,9 103:14 104:5 123:8,16 Conclusions [8] 10:16, Certainly (3] 33:5 55: 1,3,6,8,13 122:4,13,20 Best (4] 68:9 81:2,6 134: 19 14:22 16:4 30:13 40:

22 121:17 1 ,11,21 124:1 130:8 20 13 107:3 132:11 Certify (1] 137:9 [(] 124:16 Better (2] 38:8 50:17 Concrete (1] 131:14 Cetera [4] 49:1 59:4 68: Close (3] 86:2 93:1 98:10 Between (20] 25:6 27:8 Condition (2] 50:5 75:6 16 123:4 Closed [4] 3:9 12:12 69:

31:9.35:15 49:12,22 50:9, Conducted [11] 23:21 26:

Chain [1] 99:18 14-15 17 55:10 66:18 67:8 71: 3-4 30:16,19 34:7 35:10 Challenge [1] 93:22 Closing [3] 8:21 120:15 38:18 55:5 61:19 66:10 13 77:9 79:15 81:22 85: 132:6 Challenged [2] 23:6 24:6 Conducting [1] 123:7 15 87:1 90:2 132:16 134:7 Co [2) 23:15,17 Challenging 11] 23:1 Conference (15] 1:4 3:4, Beyond (2] 31:8 36:2 Change [4] 11:5 34:9 37: Co-worker [2] 23:15,17 Bit (7] 29:11 57:1 87:18 17 6:18 10:5 12:17 26:2 20 127:5 Coached [1] 48:15 61:20 118:10 119:22 127:

106:2 111:4 120:8 126:22 Changed [3] 11:5 113:8 Collect [3] 94:17 129: 11 129:21 131:19 132:14, Blank [1) 54:2 118:14 21-22 19 Blankety [1] 54:2 Collection (71 22:14,17 Changes 141 100:21 119: CONFIDENTIAL [1] 1:4 Blankety-blank [1] 54:2 8-10 23:5 24:6,13 94:15,17 Blitzed (1] 15:17 Confined [1] 105:8 Channels [I] 126:8 Collections [1] 22:11 Confirm (1] 34:18 Bloodshot (2] 91:19 123: Character [1] 25:22 Collector [6] 22:18 23:

4 Conflict [2] 82:22 113:1 Characterization [1] 50: 1,6 24:2,7 94:18 Conflicting (6] 10:12 Blue [3] 78:3 100:19-20 20 Collectors (3] 24:10,12 Board (31 129:15,17 136: 68:20 80:12 95:11 111:20 Characterize [1] 49:11 94:20 112:5 12 Characterized [1] 99:14 Collectors' (1] 94:22 Boat (1] 55:3 Conflicts (2] 80:20-21 Charles [2] 1:18 4:5 Coming 19] 10:4 13:10 45: Confront [1] 90:15 Bolster (1] 41:15 19 65:8 80:7-8 88:18 108:

Chart [3] 11:12 14:8 130: Confused (2] 57:1 100:10 Bond (2] 4:17 14 18 134:5 Bottom [1] 115:10 Confusion (1] 63:11 Check [2] 27:14 93:3 Comment [4] 9:4 116:9 Bound I1] 130:16 117:2 128:13 Connection [3] 55:8 62:

Checks (1] 122:14 12 73:9 Branch [3] 2:3 4:3 Chief (2] 2:3 4:3 Commentary [1] 73:17 Break (3] 8:17 44:2 121: Comments (5] 40:19 51: Conscious (6] 10:1 13:

Child [1] 63:19 15 15:8 30:3 40:2 45:1

16. 17 60:i8 85:11,13 Chilled (2] 29:12 35:5 Consequence (2] 45:17 Breath 116) 16:11,19 59: Commission [7] 1:2,5,9-Chilling (11] 8:3 14:16 46:4 14 62:19 64:3,9,14 72:20 10,14 3:5 137:21 19:1 30:1,7 32:10,21 36: Conservative [2] 108:16 73:3,15 74:1,7 85:2,4-5 Commissioned (5] 1:13 2,7 40:15 52:8 124:2 125:3 25:22 33:8 38:11 137:7 Chose [2] 41:4 93:19 Consider [1] 130:17 Brief [1] 120:3 Committed [1] 34:15 Christmas [2] 86:10,14 Consideration [2] 127:

Briefing [1] 66:21 Communication [2] 17:9 Chuck [6] 7:2 8:18 113: 14-15 Briefly (2] 7:1,3 46:1 18 115:4 126:21 132:14 Considered [4] 28:6 48:

Bring [7] 41:19 50:6-7 Community [2] 20:11 110:

Chuck's [1) 132:7 21 76:16 108:17 75:18 96:11,22 111:10 22 Cindy [1] 3:1 Considers [(] 9:5 Broad [1] 60:15 Company [8] 1:4 2:8 3:5, Circa [1] 32:12 20 6:13 39:14 50:12 63:10 Consistently [1] 53:12 Broke [I] 44:5 Circle (1] 120:9 Complete (10] 3:8 16:1 Consultant (6] 2:20 6:3 Brought. 4] 15:13 31:20 Circumstance [1] 60:14 26:5 45:20 59:16 60:12 34:5 36:21 37:2 38:11 42:9 98:4 Circumstances (2] 7:10 68:3 126:12-13 137:12" Consultants [1) 15:21 Bruce (2] 1:19 4:2 94:6 Completeness 11] 70:18 Consulting [1] 33:10 Built [2] 122:15 132:6 MIA [2] 77:7 98:8 Civil (15] 8:13 14:4,11 Complexities [1] 39:11 Contact [4] 63:1 77:10 18:19,21 52:3 128:6,8,19- Complicated (2) 11:10 98:9,22

£lureau (1] 25:20 u ((2] 20:22 70:6 20,22 129:2,5,12-13 127:8 Contacts (1] 99:9 CL [I] 33:15 Comply 13] 9:12 18:7 41:5 Contained 11] 128:17 Burn I1l 26:20 Claim (6] 23:15,22 28:16 Burning [1] 12:20 Comprehensive (2] 16:1 Context [4] 91:12 101:

29:3,6 35:7 26:5 19 102:16 108:10 C Claimed [41 24:5 27:18 Concern [34] 6:1 14:5, Continue [4] 9:3 36:12, C.S.R. (2] 1:12 137:6 94:10 111:18 13 17:15 18:1 21:10,21 14 69:12 Camera [1] 5:8 Claims [9] 21:7 22:10 23: 23:10 25:15 29:17,19 31: Continued [1] 2:1 Cannot [1] 9:15 12 24:2 29:9 57:18 95:2- 8 40:6 42:12 53:17-18,20 Continues (1] 103:5 Capacity (1] 29:19 3 125:13 54:4"58:17,19 62:12 64: Continuing (2] 41:22 42:

Capristo (35] 2:14 5:22 Clarification [2) 86:21 21 73:15 88:13 99:16,21 13 13:13,18 29:10,15 30:10 123:17 106:17 108:18 109:3 118: Contract [10] 14:3,7,10 31:19 33:1,5 34:15,22 36: Clarifications (1] 49:6 14 121:14,19 122:17 123:1 18:19-20 33:15 34:3,12 12,21 37:12,16 41:16 42: Clarify [4] 66:9 132:12, Concerned [7] 8:20 17:9, 44:15 52:2 7,19 43:2,6,11,22 44:4, 20 136:5 14 26:17 57:8 93:5,9 Contradicted [1] 57:19 13 49:8 50:15 65:15 69: Clarifying E1] 125:22 Concerning [3] 3:6 14:

Contradictory [4] 21:6, 19 72:9 74:4 75:5 97:12 Clean M1] 92:1 18 67:5 22 22:16 24:1 122:5 Clear [3] 10:5 75:7 134: Concerns [24] 2:15 10:1 Contrary [1] 121:5 Care El] 5:10 15 11:14 14:3 17:10 20:1 22:

Contrast [1] 50:1 Career (1] 116:12 Clearly [9] 21:16 52:12 17 30:18 32:5 35:9,13-14 36:4 43:19 45:3 46:5 60: Control [21 23:16 102:9 Carried [1] 15:5 76:21 96:7 104:16,21 108:

11 112:19 "123:9 3 68:13 109:12 110:11,14 Controlled (1] 134:21 Carry (1] 133:7 Cleveland [97] 2:16 5: 111:6 122:2 Conversation [33] 25:6 Case (7] 6:21 7:20 8:2 9:

20 12:21 13:12,18 19:8, Conclude [3] 18:4,20 52: 66:18 67:8 71:13 75:22 7 108:8 115:17 124:7

21 85:15,17,21 86:12 87: 21 Describe [1] 7:13 Done [8] 26:3 42:14 46:1 1 88:6 90:2,19 91:16 94: Credible [8] 21:5 28:14 Described [2] 7:9 127:4 68:2 96:8 100:4 117:16 11 100:6,8,13 101:2,4,6, 29:8 98:7 107:16,19 109: Desired [1] 50:4 Dope [1] 84:9 11,15 102:6 103:7,9 6 122:16 Detail (5] 19:9 21:8 23: Doubts [1] 105:6 Conversations (7] 85:12, Creed (4] 1:20 4:11 -0:14 13 44:1 45:9 Down [10] 10:9 34:18 44:

22 88:17 107:6 109:15 Crew [2] 97:6-7 Detailed (3] 25:5 98:8 2 79:5 90:21 109:17 115:

Coordination [1] 1:18 Criticizing [1] 80:5 Detailing [1] 29:5 6,13 116:11 133:14 Copies [2] 119:13 Crosswalk (1] 130:15 Details (3] 12:22 13:13 Dr (5] 38:11,16 39:3,16 Copy [4] 13:5 77:19 100: Crucial (1] 124:7 113:14 49:9 19 119:14 Cultural [5] 30:15 33:7 Detect (2] 62:15 99:10 Draw [1] 10:15 Corporate E1] 51:18 35:18 37:10 41:10 Detected [9] 16:16,18 Drew [1] 108:22 Correct [32] 13:6 28:11 Culture (6] 33:19 39:9 17:4 16:5 19:16 77:13 98: Drift E1] 96:14 34:22 42:21 43:1,6,12,22 41:14-15,20-21 11 99:1 123:19 Drink [5] 53:3 91:21 92:

46:9 47:22 48:9 53:14 66: CYNTHIA [1] 1:15 Detection [3] 18:8 21:4 5,7 105:6 14 69:19 70:15 79:7 81: 46:15 Drinker [4] 77:2 92:5 20-21 82:7,18 83:22 85: Determination [21 115: 93:19 108:12 19 88:15,19 89:6,10,16 D&Z [2] 58:5 84:6 22 116:2 Drinking [28] 20:19 75:

91:6 92:14 93:21 122:8 Daily [2] 77:10 98:9 8 88:1 101:16 102:2-3

[18] 2:17 6:12 25:18- Determine [5] 26:5 95:

137:11 14 108:5 115:2 123:14 103:21-22 104:2,4-6,8-9, Corrected [(] 126:2 19,22 26:7,11,14 61:21- 13-14,21-22 105:9 106:3, 22 63:6 64:17 71:15 78: Develop [2] 55:19 68:21 Corrections [2] 91:6-7 11,15,21.107:13,20'112:

20 87:17 99:5 114:19 126: Developed (10] 25:18 26: 20 125:19 133:14 Corrective [3] 7:19 44: 10 55:14,16 56:4 66:20 12 Drivers [1] 42:9 18 94:4 77:4,16 80:18 Danada [1] 4:18 DRP [1] 4:3 Correctly [2] 15:1 101:1 Developing (1] 121:19 Data (3] 66:15 123:6 127: Drug [1] 22:19 Corroborate [3] 29:6 Development [1] 132:16 9 Drunk [61] 22:7 54:2,18, 123:1,5 Deviate [1] 120:8 Date (6] 69:8 83:16 86: 21 55:19-20 56:14,19-20 Corroborated [3] 94:20 22 114:9 124:21 Devised [1] 45:15 57:5,14 60:8 61:2,8,13 99:21 110:6 Dated [2] 16:5 38:17 Differences (3] 49:22 .62:20 63:21 64:5 66:22 Corroborating [1] 10:14 50:9,17 Dates (3] 135:7-9 74:18 76:7,9-10,15-16 77:

Corroboration [3] 54:18 62:9 122:10 Dawn El] 4:20 Different [13] 40:4 41: 2 78:4-5,10 80:3-4,15 83:

Days [21 63:22 131:3 9-10 44:7 78:18 84:2 90: 8 89:11 91:2,12 94:1,15 Couch [1] 58:10 Couched [1] 58:12 Deal (3] 3:11 29:4 113:10 3 105:18 107:3,22 132:11, 97:22 100:22 101:16 102:

21.136:8 14 103:21-22 104:17 106:

Counsel (10] 1:19 2:12 Dealing [3] 95:10 117:

Differentiating [1] 115: 11,13 117:3 122:2,20 124:

4:2 5:2,17 15:19 53:1 66: 21 133:13 21 18 125:4,20 21 101:7 127:18 Dealt (1] 117:18 Differently [1] 28:3 DU [1] 137:3 Counseled [4) 48:16 94: Debate (1] 107:12 Difficult [4] 10:3,9 12: Duane [1] 44:8 4 108:15 124:2 December [46] 31:16 32: 6 80:9 Due [1] 15:18 County (2] 137:3,8 13 38:19 56:18 57:3 58:7 Difficulties [1] 117:17. Duly [1] 137:7 Couple (5] 61:11 81:15 64:22.70:17 74:15 76:6 Difficulty [2] 10:14 80: DuPage (11 137:8 120:8 125:2 131:3 78:7-8 79:7,14,16,19 81:. 15 17 82:1,13 83:15-16,18- During (17] 9:1 13:15 14:

Course [14] 11:4-513:16 Direct [3) 38:8 89:18 17 15:6 16:22 29:14 35:

15:9 16:22 19:4,9 35:8 20 85:11,16-18 86:4,7,15 87:2 88:7 96:16 100:8 107:20 21 37:10-11 62:13 69:1-2 36:6 101:9 128:2,18,21 Directed [31.27:12 28:1 70:13 72:9 114:5 131:19 129:5 101:2,11 114:13 124:21-22 125:1 107:14 134:13 COURT E1] 43:21 Direction [1] 38:10 Duty (65] 3:7 8:6 9:22 Coutu (61] 2:10 5:18 9: Decide [1] 103:2 Decision [11] 6:17,19 7: Directly [15] 30:17 34: 14:3,5,13 15:5 17:5,7,16 19 11:10,21 12:3,14 13: 6 35:3 37:1 38:2,20 41: 18:3,7,11-12 24:3,17 30:

12 21:13 27:11 29:10 30: 15,21 8:9 45:2 107:22 6 31:22 32:12 38:4 39:18 9 32:15 35:2,5 36:11 40: 108:16 118:21 119:2 124:2 17-18 49:20 74:11 75:5 40-17,22 41:5 52:10,12 Decisions [3] 8:12 9:1 89:19 96:3 108:21 109:21 18,20 43:15 44:17 51:22 Director [5] 1:15 2:21 53:17 54:3 58:10,17-18, 53:3 54:7 55:4 57:16 61: 129:19 22 59:3,10,17 60:3 62:12 Defend [2] 11:1 72:16 3:2 6:4,8 11 62:2,22 68:9 70:1,7, 64:21 77:13 84:8 88:14 13,16'71:2 75:1 76:9 80: Define [1] 123:1" Disagree [3].129-5,7,10 89:9 90:17 91:18 93:5,10, 9 82:14 94:9 95:18 102:2, Disconnect [4] 55:9 60:

Definitely [2] 55:17 81: 13,18 95:15,21 96:3.99:3 15 104:7,18 105:12,14 1 68:5 79:15 105:4 106:10,17 107:9-10 14 111:18 117:4 118:1 119:8, Discount [1] 112:13 112:21 114:15-16 121:12-Definitive (2] 60:16 83:

11 126:1,11,14,17 131:11, 15 Discover (13 13:16 13 122:6 133:19 135:2 14 132:3 134:15 135:17 Deleted [3] 54:2 56:14 Discovered (2] 19:3,9 Dyer [33] 1:17 3:22 8:20 Cover [4] 12:15,18 127:1 124:28 Discovery [1] 70:11 65:20 66:13 67:3,5,17,21 134:20 Deliberate (3] 9:6 45:2 Discuss [4] 7:3,14 9:5 68:2 69:16,20 71:17,21 Covered (1] 24:1 57:18 72:2 88:11,16,20,22 89:5, 111:12 Covering [1] 13:17 Deliberately [4] 3:7 9: Discussed [1] 78:11 17 100:9 105:22 109:5 Craft [55] 2:17 6:12 25: Discussing [2] 81:16 97: 118:15 119:9 120:14 121:

9 14:2 19:20 18-19 39:8,10 61:21 62:1, 17 10,22 132:4-5 135:16 Deliberations [1] 127:5 6 63:3,6,12 64:17-18 65: Discussion [3] 43:8 86: Dyer's (2] 68:10 108:21 Demographically [3] 33:

3,6,9,14 66:4 71:16 77: 11,14 34:2 15 88:22 16 78:14,19-20 87:15-16, Distinction (2] 55:13 Demographics (1] 37:18 Early [4] 32:779:8 91:

21 88:4,12,15,19,21 89:2, 106:14 22 98:10 10,16,21 90:10,14 91:10, Demonstrate [1] 15:4 Denial (4] 20:5 28:22 51: Division [2] 1:15 3:2 Earning [1] 49:22 15 92:14 93:16,21 98:19 Easy [1] 117:21" 14 70:21 Dixon [5] 1:21 4:7 37:8, 100:14 116:7-9 117:5,12 Denied (16] 8:6 25:11 31: 15 Editorializing (1] 64:10 126:13 Craft's [4] 71:17 81:6 16 46:10,18-19,22 47:1, Dixon-Herrity (5] 1:21 Edward [2] 2:21 6:8 18 48:10 67:13 68:12 70: 4:7 37:8,15 Effect [12] 8:3 13:14-15 99:5 119:13 Create (4] 20:12 30:7,10 2,20 71:7 103:6 Document [22] 11:18 12: 19:1 30:2,7 32:10,21 36:

111:1 Denies (1] 22:14 . 10 24:18,21 25:5,12 66: 8 40:15 52:9 126:4 Deny [5] 17:2 70:1 128: 17 67:5,7 71:12 75:21 76: Effects [1] 14:16 Created (2] 19:1 52:9 3 77:15,17,21 100:2,9,11, 22 129:1-2. Effort [1] 33:8 Credibility [10] 21:12,

E M

5[ 20:18 70:5-6 24:18 Fair [1] 130:11 119:21 131:2 A 19 Examples [2] 23:12 121: Fairly [1] 49:14 Follow [7] 8:18 17:14 25:

Either (9] 47:20 51:17 15 3 45:2 98:13 99:6 122:21 Fall [2] 31:6 79:1 74:18 78:22 105:19 125:3 Excellent [2] 34:13 108: False [3] 14:12 122:11 Follow-along [1] 8:18 129:9-10 130:3 4 134:12 Follow-up (8] 34:7 37:

Elaborate [11 91:11 Except (1] 68:18 Familiar [1] 12:1 17 61:19 66:19 71:14-15 Elaborated El] 99:13 Exceptions (1] 121:4 Family [1] 116:16 98:13 99:6 Element (2] 17:17 59:17 Exchange [3] 10:22 136: Far [4] 8:19 11:13 46:7 Followed [1] 14:2 Elements [3) 17:15,19-20 11,14 86:22 Following (6] 8:15,18 Elicited [2) 60:18 61:9 Exclusive [1] 113:1 Father [2] 73:9 84:18 17:9 67:13 69.:6 119:7 Embezzlement [1] 117:19 Excuse [5] 34:10 56:22 Fax [3) 13:3,7,9 For-cause [18] 18:8,13 Emphasize [3] 75:19 127: 78:19 86:19 127:11 Faxed [2] 13:5 128:11 23:17,21 72:11,17-18,21 3 129:18 Execute [1] 3:7 FBI [1] 117:7 73:4-5 92:12-13 93:19 95:

Employed [1) 79:12 Executed (2] 100:3,12 4 106:17 122:3 123:7,20 Feared (1] 21:1 Exhibited [2] 59:13 97:9 Force [9] 36:17 39:1,10-Employee [19] 2:14 5:22 February [6] 16:5 40:1 Exhibiting [1] 59:9 11,13-41:10,14,21 52:15 9:22 17:10 26:8,14 27:6 66:13 69:17 70:3,22 29:16,19 40:6 42:11 43: Exhibits [1] 96:9 Forced [1) 10:15 Federal [1] 25:20 19 49:5 63:9 99:22 106: Exist [13 34:13 Foregning [1] 137:11 FedExed [1] 126:15 11 111:5-6 122:1 Existed [3] 32:3 35:12 -Foreman [22] 14:6-7,14 Fellow [1] 20:20 Employees (9] 31:3,6,9 41:20 fi:I&,2U 18:3 22:3,7,15 Felt [1] 72:16 32:6 37:21 50:12 59:2 84: Expand [1) 54:7 23:15 24:3 26:18 57:2 94:

Few [4] 3:17 8:17 33:21 13,16,18,21 95:1 99:7 6 95:13 Expect [1] 124:3 113:19 Employer [3) 49:13,21 Expectation [4] 20:1 48: Form [3] 45:10,20 112:8 FFD (14] 2:16 19:2 20:1 Employment (4] 50:5,9- 16 121:20 122:18 Formal [1] 8:19 45:2-3 46:t 49:7 58:4 10,18 Expectations [2] 49:21 Formally [1] 71:7 109:20 121:1,14 122:16 Encompass [1] 59:3 50:13 123:1 135:3 Former [3] 116:12,18 Encourage [1] 8:7 Experience [2] 25:20 68o Fieldwork [1) 38:18 Forth [3] 50:6 90:18 137:

End [8] 5:8 11:20 15:22 21 Fifth [5) 21:3,11,14 28: 13 70:3,22 71:19 75:4 126:17 Experienced (1) 35:16 13 112:5 Forward [3] 20:15 50:7 Enforcement [28] 1:4,21- Expert [1] 33:9 File [10] 26:8,14 27:2,4, 88:8 22 3:4 4:5,8 6:17-18,22 Expires (1] 137:21 7,13-14 28:4 99:22 130:7 Foundation [1] 9:15 7:3-4,21 8:11 12:17 19:6 Explain [5] 15:7 27:3 Final [6] 9:1 31:11 131: Four [15] 16:10,18 19:19 26:1 52:16 118:10,17 119: 30:5 31:14 114:10 12,20 133:21 134:8 28:21 46:11-12,19 47:2,8, 6 120:14 126:22 127:7,17 Explained [2) 50:3 60:21 Finally [8] 8:7 20:22 10,14 70:2 77:11 112:3 129:16 132:2,14-15 Explains [1] 132:10 26:21 39:21 40:14 49:8 127:7 Enforcement/inves tigatio Explanation [E] 92:2 131:15 132:17 Fourth [2] 128:7 129:1 n [1] 1:18 Findings [5) 19:5,12,22 Frame [20] 23:20 27:16, Expletive [5] 54:2 56:

Engineering (1] 4:15 63:4 66:11 19,21-22 32:4,16 33:17 14 60:8 63:21 124:18 Entered [1] 27:17 Fine [1] 126:20 35:9 48:7 69:22 70:17 71:

Explicit [13 32:9 11 78:15 79:8 81:7,18,20 Entire (4] 26:2 33:8 38: Exploration [1] 91:13 Finer [1] 59:17 13 63:13 82:19 88:7 Express (1] 50:12 Finish [3] 61:4 90:11" Entirely [1] 108:9 Framework [21 9:12,15 Expressed [3] 50:8 97:9 102:20 Entirety El] 39:16 First [19] 3:19 12:15 21: Free [13 35:13 109:3 Friends [2] 73:8 84:18 Environment [15) 10:1 Extensive (1] 65:16 10,21 22:1 23:14 29:22 13:15 15:8 29:13 30:4 33: 30:15 46:6 53:8 56:4 70: Frustration [1] 80:17 Extent [5] 34:2 42:7,20 Fully (3] 3:15 6:20 7:14 18 35:6,12,17,21 38:9,13, 19 88:11 98:16 110:4 120:

85:3 96:22 19 124:12 126:7 127:3 Fundamental (1] 50:8 20 40:3 44:14 Eyes [4] 20:13 91:19 111:

Environmental (1] 30:18 Fit [8] 24:3 93:5,10,12, Funk [2) 4:20 1 123:4 Erroneous [1] 95:2 17 107:9-10 116:2 Furnish (1] 103:4 F Fitness (60] 3:7 8:5 9:

Error [1] 94:3 Future [2] 118:22 124:4 Errors (1] 7:12 Fab [1] 102:8 22 14:3,5,13 15:5 17:5,7, a Fabrication [2] 102:6 16 18:7,11-12 24:17 30:6 Escalated [2] 19:6 52:15 31:22 32:12 38:3 39:18 Gained [1] 15:2 Escort (2] 22:20 23:2 134:21 Gait [4] 48:22 91:19 121:

Facilities [15] 8:4 30: 40.17,22 41:5 52:10,12 Escorted (7] 22:10,14 53:17 54:3 58:10,17-18, 18 123:4 8 31:10 40:16 42:16,18 24:5 94:15,17,21-22 22 59:10,17 60:3 62:11 Garmo n[2] 2:6 5:6 43:3,5 44:2,9 50:1,3 52:

Escorting El] 24:13 64:21 77:13 84:7 88:14 Gary [2] 2:18 6:10 9 78:22 118:7 Especially [1] 65:10 Facility [9] 3:9 19:2 89:9 91:17 96:3 98:12 99: Gather f1] 6:16 Essentially [3] 24:20 29:20 31:4 32:2.42:21 2,10 105:4 106:10,17 108: General [12] 5:1 33:19 66:20 118:8 8,19 112:21 114:15-16 46:5 4-.-1 52:13 53:1 SS-118:4,6,12 Establish [4] 61:15,18 121:12-13,20 122:3,6 133: 17-18 60:4,15 99:6 127:18 Fact [28) 9:21 11:5 13:

104:7 105:11 19 135:2,13 Generally [2] 50:15 62:

19 15:3 18:5 21:19 23:8 Et [4] 49:1 59:4 68:15 27:22 36:3,6 39:6 41:1 Five [6] 19:15 47:13,17 20 123:4 50:4 52:2 61:13 62:4,10 112:3 115:9 116:3 Generator [2] 31:5 37:13 Evaluation (2] 14:15 31: 67:15 68:18 80:16 89:17 Five-hour [1] 116:3 Gentlemen [21 32:11 58:6 11 90:15 94:20 112:16 113:5 Five-hours [1] 115:9 Ginny [163 5:7,11 13:1 Evaluations [2] 30:14 115:2 133:13 136:3 Fleet [7] 5:22 29:16 30: 68:2 72:3 86:19 88:16 89:

43:9 Fact-finding [13 15:3 15 33:8 44:3,11 46:20 6 90:10 102:20 103:11 Event [2] 97:21 125:5 Factor [1] 8:12 Fleet-wide (3] 33:7 45: 107:4 117:15 119:20 124:

Events [2] 10:17 29:18 Facts [9] 6:21 7:9,13,20 19,21 5,8 Evidence [9] 26:15 40: 10:10 13:22 14:9,22 100: Focus [8] 21:14 42:8,17 Giovanna [3] 2:2 5:1 52:

15 56:3,16,21 89:7 107: 16 55:11 95:8,11 108:3-4 22 16 112:6 133:2 Fahey [4] 1:23 5:3 135:9 Focused [9] 19:15 36:13 Given [3] 88:7 94:6 130:2 Exact [2] 10:5 69:8 Fail (1] 50:7 42:4,14 53:12 55:2,21 57: Goal [2] 10:22 132:13 Exactly [5] 49:19-20 64: Failed [8] 9:9 14:2,5 17: 9 60:21 Gordon (3] 2:13 6:6.12:4 4 18:7 19:20 36:4 47:14 Focusing [3] 89:13 101: Government [1] 6:5 4 108:3 134:16 Failing [1] 3:7 14 123:13 Granted [1] 45:14 Examination (1] 73:4 Failure [1] 46:14 Focussed [1] 60:1 Examiner [2] 116:19 117: Gravamen (1] 109:3 Faint [7] 48:18,21 V2:15 Folks [9] 11:13-14 39:2 11 * -. n f. ¶. %A.,O

" 1 A1-4 Great (4] 28:5 29:4 113:

Green [3] 3:14 49:19 110: Help [4] 55:5 66:9 86:22 Imposition El] 128:6 Initiatives (1] 15:4 19 98:21 In-depth [2] 111:8 115:1 Ink (2] 78:3 100:20 Ground [1] 102:8 Helpful E1] 134:8 In-house [1] 5:16 Input (2] 42:13,18 Group (19] 4:16 30:20 31: Helps [1] 87:3 Inability ([] 29:8 Inside (5] 16:13 59:8,14 2 33:12-13,15-16 34:3-4 Hereby [1] 137:8 Inaccurate [4] 18:22 52: 84:7 110:1 36:14,20 37:1,5,22 38:3, Hereinabove [1] 137:13 7 135:6,11 Insight [1] 14:15 15,22 39:7 49:15 Herrity (5] 1:21 4:7 37: Incident [10] 16:2 40: Insinuation E1] 84:16 Grouping [1] 34:8 22 60:5 61:10 63:17 64:1 Inspection [1] 84:22 Groups [1] 42:6 [51 97:16 98: 78:7 86:1 96:12 97:17 Inspector (4] 2:5 4:10, Guess (5] 88:11 105:14 Incidental [1] 62:22 17,21 120:22 124:12 135:19 Qý [139] 14:4,11 High (2] 12:18 15:11 Highlight [1] 19:11 Include [2] 83:4 119:21 Included [4] 7:11,15 58:

Instructions [1] 128:15 Instrument (11 33:11

-8:20 -. &:13,19 21:2,8 24: Himself (8] 59:13 60:17 4 96:1 Integrally [1] 29:21 22 25:4,6-7,9,11,14,17 72:10,16,20 91:17 116:2-3 Includes (1] 22:2 Intend [1] 10:18 26:16 27:4,9,13 28:3,7, Hired [2] 25:19 99:7 Including (3] 60:18 76: Intended El] 136:12 17,20 29:4 47:21 48:2,15 History [3] 49:14 92:16 18 77:4 52:3,6,13 54:1,17,19 56: Intent [1] 115:10 106:20 Inclusive [1] 121:7 10,17,21 57:3,6,10,13 60: Interest [3] 30:17 65:

Hit. [1] 27:1 Income E1] 49:22 12 74:22 6-7 61:7 62:10,15 63:18 Hold [8] 70:8-9,12,20 71: Incomplete [4] 18:22 52: Interested [2] 36:6,10 64:22 66:19 67:9 71:14 74:15-16 75:22 76:4,6,13 3,5 102:18 132:18 6 135:5,10 Interpret [1] 114:18 77:22 78:8 79:10-11,13, Holiday (1] 86:14 Independent (10] 15:19-Interpretation E1] 90:4 18,22 80:2 81:17,22 83:7 Holidays [2] 86:3,7 20 27:14 33:9 38:11 62:9 66:4 106:6 107:5 133:6 Interpreting [1] 78:12 85:9,16 86:1,13 87:1,3,7, Homework [1) 127:14 Indicate [2] 107:7 109: Interrogations [1] 117:8 11 88:18 89:4,8,20 90:2, Homicide E1] 116:14 5,7-8,15 91:15 92:3 93:2, 11 Interrupt [2] 13:2 67:22 Hope (2] 10:21 11:3 4,14 94:2 101:12 102:7,9 Indicated [5] 42:13 .48: Interrupting (1] 58:15 Hostile [1] 136:12 103:5,17 104:11,13 106:4, 20 96:5 98:14 99:8 Interview (27] 15:3 22:

Hour (5] 23:17 109:4-5 7,19,21 107:6,14,17 108: Indicating [5] 15:22 76: 5,13 23:3 25:10 38:12 39:

116:3 1,6 109:2,7 110:4-5 112: 16,18 77:17 90:22 15 61:22 63:15 65:5,17 Hours [4] 105:8 115:9 72:9 77:5 87:5,10,16 96:

8 114:8,12 115:1 116:11 117:5-6 Indication [3] 17:6 95:

118:3 123:18 124:2,14,16, 20 105:2 15 101:9 113:22 114:1,3-House (1] 5:16 5,7-8 115:1 117:4 22 125:1,10,14,17 133:15, Indicators [3] 38:4 121:

Hudson [1] 6:5 Interviewed [21] 24:10 18'134:12 135:1-2,8,10 16 123:3 Hung (2] 93:6 106:15 40:7 47:5 56:5-6 58:16 Individual [34] 9:8 17:

U ,11 [6] 62:18 82:

92:14 127:12 'Idea [3] 38:22 58:9 73:6 10-11,15 21:7,15,18 41:7 45:12 51:11 61:13 63:1-2 67:12 72:8 87:7 94:20 95:

19 96:2-3 97:12,15 99:5, Gun [1] 100:15 74:4 81:2 84:20 94:12,21- 8 100:14 114:19 135:8-9 Identified [11] 15:4 16:

Guy (1] 73:17 22 95:9,12,14 96:5-6,10 Interviewing [1] 76:22 9 26:7 30:1 33:17 34:8, Guys [5] 65:1 74:17 80:2 11 39:5 42:6 49:17 110:2 97:18 98:1 99:4 111:22 Interviews [16] 10:12 83:7 125:2 112:7 118:11 127:11 131: 26:12 40:12 61:16 69:2 Identifies (2] 33:13 37:

1 132:18 77:4,16 80:11 87:3,11 98:

H 3 Individual's (3] 51:12 6 109:12 110:7 113:21 Habits (2] 20:19 54:10 Identify *8] 23:19 33:

54:8,10 Introduction [1] 29:16 Hal [11] 2:20 6:2 15:21 12 37:19 39:16,19 98:18 99:22 Individuals (44] 8:4 9: Introductions [1] 3:19 20:8 26:3 58:1 66:11 69: 12 10:15 12:7 15:16 16: Investigated (2] 17:18-7,11 72:4 83:12 Idiot [1] 26:19 Ignore [1] 110:10 10,14,18 17:3 21:16 35:6, 19 Half W1] 15:16 13,16 46:10 47:4 52:14 Investigation (56] 10:4 Hall (3] 20:10 49:12 110: III 8] 1:10 3:3 4:1,4,6, 54:19 56:13 69:1 70:19 12:19,22 13:13,16 14:21 19 9,11,14 73:14 76:14 81:3 94:10-Illinois (4] 1:11,13 15:9,12,14 16:1,7,9,17 Hand [3] 78:3 100:18 115: 11 95:3 96:1-2 97:16 98: 17:1,8,13-14 19:15,19 25:

6 137:1,8 7 106:8 107:7,17 109:1,7 21 26:2,6 28:2 29:14 41:

Handout [4] 30:10 1304 Immediate (7] 16:14 18: 110:3 112:2,13,16 113:8 12 54:22 55:2,15-16 58:2, 15-16 15 45:6 46:3 49:3 110:9 133:7 134:22 135:21 4 61:20 63:7,14 64:19 65:

Handwriting [2] 77:20 111:12 Infer (2] 64:6 105:20 22 66:2-3,10 67:18-19 68:

90:22 Immediately [3] 25:3 45: Inference [1] 107:20 12,14 69:8,10 70:14 71:

17 67:12 -. 18 105:16,21 107:1-2 108:

Hang (11 103:12 Information [76] 3:8 6:

Impact [2] 31:8 40:21 16 7:14 10:11,19,22 11:3- 5 126:4 134:13 135:19 Hard (7] 10:10 102:15 116:13,15,22 117:9 Impacts [1] 29:12 4,19 14:12 15:2,6 17:12 Investigation-related Hardly [1] 115:14 Impaired [8] 57:7 61:14, 18:22 26:12 27:4 29:1 52: (1] 41:12 17 62:5,17 96:20 105:3 5,7 54:13,16 55:14 60:12 Investigations [19] 5:4 Harold [1] 78:1 107:21 62:3 69:3,5 71:12 75:1 13:22 14:9,17 15:7 16:6 Hatch [1] 129:15 Impairment [8] 59:4 81: 76:12,16 80:16,18-21 83: 17:22 19:4,10 25:22 26:4 Hate (i] 97:22 3 96:6 97:10 98:3 112:16, 2,4 88:9 101:10 105:17- 41:9,12-13 51:22 52:6 55:

He-said-that-he-said 21 113:3 18 106:6 112:14,18,22 5 95:22 126:7

[1] 2.4:20 Imperceptible [4] 48:18, 113:7 119:4 120:13 122:6 Investigative (7] 6:2 Head [3] 32:14 49:18 135: 21 91:20 108:17 124:6,10,19 125:7 126:3, 16:3 19:12 29:5 69:13 7 Implement [1] 133:18 6,8 127:13,16,19 130:2 117:16 123:13 Headed (1] 133:10 Implicated (1] 115:11 132:9,19 133:4,21 134:3, Investigator [9] 1:23 2:

Headquarters [3] 4:8,22 Implies [1] 6:17" 6,12 135:2,6,11,20 136:3, 2,17 14:12 15:20-21 20:8 52:20 7,11,14 113:22 116:18 Importance [5] 45:6,16 Heads (1] 15:16 Informed [5] 14:13 19:" Investigators [5] 22:1 46:2 49:3,6 Hear [7] 3:16 8:13 53:8, 14 77:22 125:10,14 25:2,10 68:22 135:11 Important (27] 6:19 21.

10 88:3 104:1,18 Informing [1] 85:9 Invited [1] 116:16 20 27:11,16,21 31:1 33:

Heard [2] 132:8 134:1 15,21 35:11,19 36:2 38: Initial [16] 16:6,9 17: Involved (7] 8:5 11:13 Hearing (4] 1:5 7:22 21 40:20 41:19 43:15,18 12,21 41:3 65:22 66:10 21:22 23:11,14 29:21 35:

136:20 137:10 56:2 62:8 68:6,16 69:4 68:11 69:2 70:14 91:7 98: 16 Hearsay [1] 24:20 79:3 81:4 115:9 118:2,8 14 109:12 112:3,12 114:9 Involves (3] 22:8 24:18 124:11 Initialed (11 100:20 25:16 Heavy E3] 77:2 92:5 93:18 Importantly (1] 39:14 Initiated (1] 124:4 Involving (3] 14:5,14 Held [2] 50:6,10 Impose (1] 129:4 Initiating [1] 108:14 47:6 Hell [1] 63:19

ISI [1] 98:21 9 4:9 5:16 6:7 8:5 9:21 _3521_5:10,14,16 Manager [11] 1:20 2:13-16:13 22:11 29:20 30:6-* Q ((5] 73:9 77:20 Island (1] 44:8 14,16 4:12 5:21 6:1,7 29:

Isolate E1] 34:2 21 31:4,9 39:17 40:7 42: 2092:19 125:7 17,20 40:6 Isolation (2] 38:3 44:5 17 43:10-11,13,16 44:5, Length [1] 78:11 Managers [1] 127:22 13 45:2 46:12 58:2 59:3 Lenience El] 73:10 Managing [1] 39:12 Issue (28) 8:6 10:9 15:

73:20 84:11,21 85:6 Less [2] 34:16 37:4 19 17:16 19:2 27:20 29: Manifest 11] 112:20 Key (1] 47:5 11 30:7 31:20,22 32:11- Lesser (1] 42:7 Manifested (1] 39:7 12,20-21 35:20 38:4 39: Kind [8] 12:20 36:1,16 Letter [7] 8:2 16:5 40:1 Manner [3] 9:13 58:12 13,18,22 40:17 42:20 96: 43:18 44:1 85:12 90:8 69:17 70:22 71:22 135:15 136:8 4 101:14 109:20 111:21 100: 15 Level [2] 12:18 15:11 Manual (2] 118:18 119:6 114:20 135:6 Kinds (2] 42:5 117:19 Liar [2] 116:15,20 March (91 22:5,12 48:10 Issued [1] 128:16 Knowledge [8] 9:10 54:

Liars [1] 116:20 51.6-7 100:5 101:2,4,6 Issues [23] 17:2,17 29: 10 59:8,15 61:5-6 89:18 Licensee (1] 38:7 6 2] 77:17 100:18 21 35:7 39:12,18 40:14 135:12 Knowledgeable' [1] 133:20 Licensee's [1] 51:10 aMed [2] 100:7 119:14 43:3 47:6 49:12,15 50:6- Licensing (2] 129:15-16 Known (5] 33:15 59:2 84: Marks (1] 77:21 7 52:10 57:18 58:4,8,22 15 108:10,12 Lied [2] 9:10 25:9 Mary (2] 1:23 5:3 59:10 61:11 74:9 84:3 96:

1 P 1] 59:9 Life [3] 26:21 30:15 116: Matter (3] 1:3 104;14 Issuing (1] 129:12 [3] 99:6,13,20 12 116:11 Light [1] 3:14 Matters [2] 116:10,19 Item [1] 46:7 L Limit (2] 84:8-9 Mean [6] 12:7 103:1 105:

Itself [2] 105:11 112:21 Labor [11] 33:15 34:3,12 Limited [2] 102:8 109:19 6 114:2 117:6 130:8 J 36:17 39:8,10 41:10 44: Line [9] 33:2,6 35:2 65: Meaning [2] 63:19 124:16 JAMES [1] 1:20 15 49:11-12,18 21 66:5 68:3 69:4 95:4 Means [1] 6:18 Jamie [1] 4:17 Lack [3] 13:14 131:20 136:1 Meant (7] 64:5,11 72:12 January [14] 22:2,9,21 Lines [1] 121:17 91:13 104:8 105:20 111:13 32:13 37:18 38:17 65:18 (1] 40:5 'Linger (1] 93:2 Mechanical [6] 14:3,10 69:14-15 72:7,13 86:7 Larger [1] 130:15 Lisle [1] 1:11 18:19,21 52:3,13 109:14 Last (4] 113:8 118:1 131: Listed [1] 62:14 Medication [1] 92:21 Jeffrey [3] 1:11 137:6, 15 134:19 LLC [2] 1:4 2:8 Meet [1] 37:5 19 Lastly [1] 8:20 Loaded [4] 22:4 80:13 94: Meeting [12] 3:3,9 6:15 Jennifer [2] 1:21 4:7 Late [2) 78:22 79:7 12-13 9:1 10:7 11:20 27:8 50:

Jim [7] 1:17 3:21-22 4: Latest [1] 92:6 Local (5] 20:11 49:12,17 10 127:6 129:20 132:13 11,14 8:20 120:14 Launched 11] 15:14 109:18 110:21 136:17 Job [23] 18:3 20:17 26: Lay [1] 13:19 Locals (1] 49:19 Melendez [2] 4:18 18 61:14,17.62:5 81:3 93: Leaders (1] 49:18 Longo [96] 2:2 5:1,7,12, Member [41 16:15 18:15 4,6,10 97:3 102:3 104:8, Leap (1] 61:12 14 13:1,8,11 34:10,20 35: 40:5 131:18 11-13 107:21 112:16,21-Least [3] 54:20 87:11 1 52:21-22 53:4,7,10,15, Members El] 40:7 22 113:3 21 54:6,12 55:1,7 56:2,7, 117:10 Memorandum [1] 27:7 Jobs [1] 98:2 9 57:22 58:14,21 59:20, Leave [2] 35:2 136:6 Memory [2] 34:16 60:11 John [4] 9:17 63f18 83: 22 60:20 61:4 62:7 63:5

_1.&. 92:18 Led (1) 17:2 Mention (3] 31:1 60:9

. 64:15,18"65:4,7,10 67:22

([47] 21:11 22: Left (2] 50:16 130:19 89:12 A W10,I"1, 23:4 24:2,5,11, Le en 1] 77:1 68:4 74:12,20 75:8,13,15 76:10 78:6,17 79:3,9 81: Mentioned (4] 29:15 43:

2=1[127] 14:8,14 4 48:4 86:16 13-14,19 25:8 26:9,15-16,. 21 82:9,20 83:10,18 85:

20 27:8 28:13 47:11,15 1:12 1 P-4,17 21:4 22:3, 15,20 86:6,9,18,20 87:14 Messenger [5] 23:2,7 24:

56:18 63:19,22 64:1,5,8, 12,15,20 23:2,5 24:3,6, B8:2,5 89:6,11 90:6,12 8,15 10,13 66:17 67:12 68:19 13 25:9 26:19 29:2 32:6 91:10 100:13 101:1,.3 102: Methodology (1] 40:4 70:4 71:12 90:22 99:15," 47:21 48:4 50:21 51:2,16 18,21 103:12,15 104:3,6, (1[] 38:12 22 101:13 103:7,17 104: 54:18,21 55:19-20 56:19 10,20 105:2,13 109:20 Microphone [11 3:13 12 109:16 111:21 124:17 57:1-2,4-5,11.14 58:19 113:13,17 117:15 119:19 Middle (1] 71:19 1Sl 130:8-9 59:13,15,18 60:17 61:2,7, 120:2,12 124:9 132:8 MIDDLESWORTH (2] 2:18 6:

[8] 21:22 23: 17 62:4,12,16 64:3,5,9, Look [20] 20:8.26:1,8 27: 10

=1,14 :16 27:1,4,6 67:5 13,19 65:2,5,10,17 72:8, 13 28:1,4 39:22 55:15 63: Might [7] 40:9 73:10 77:

Jonathan [2] 2:11 5:16 15 73:1,4 74:14,19 75:5 7,13 110:14,17-112:1-2 76:1,5,7 77:1,6,8,10 78: 15 81:5 86:22 103:14 105:

Judgment (4] 15:1 93:12 115:4-5 118:17 129:7 132: 3 2,9,21 79:20 80:3 81:9 22 135:20 94:3 113:4 Migrate [1] 31:9 83:8 84:14-15,17,19 85:2, Looking [3] 106:2 111:7 July(17] 1:6 23:19 24: 4-5,7 86:13 87:20,22 90: Migrating (3] 31:2 37:

11 27:20-21 32:4,7 35:9, 123:2 8,17 91:1,16 92:4-5,16, 22 38:22 15 37:11 81:19 82:18 101: 19 93:9,20,22 95:21 96:4, Looks [2] 86:11 97:21 Mike (1] 40:5 14 124:13 125:5 134:18 13,18 97:3,6,14,18 98:9, Lost [1] 125:11 Minimal (1] 51:14 135:13 20 99:1,9 103:18 106:9 Louden [4] 2:3 4:3 5:13 Mint [1] 74:7 July-August [2] 81:19 107:10 108:10-11 110:4 Loudly [1] 3:15 82:18 Mints [4] 64:3,9,14 73:15 112:20 124:20 125:1,3,16, Lying [2] 25:1 116:18 June 119) 8:2 23:4 24:19 ,1,9_127:11,130:7 133:13,16 Minute (1] 86:19 Z

25:17 26:16 27:2,19 28:9 -III(~[13] 20:19 Ma'am (1] 34:16 Minutes [1] 3:17 Misheard (1] 104:2 66:16 67:3-4,20 69:21 71: "I:16 62TT874:21 77:11 10,19 91:9 99:21 100:4 Madeda (25] 2:4 4:9 7:6 Miss [3] 89:5 101:1 109:

83:6 88:14 89:9 97:1 105:

135:15 13:7,9 47:3,8,12,16,19 20 9 0 108:8 48:1,5,8,12,14 51:9,16, d 82] 25:4,6-7,11 Missed [1] 55:3 21 70:4 120:18,22 121:4, Kay [2] 1:23 5:3 1*4:20, 56:12,16 57:10 60: Mister [3] 56:22 105:13 7,9 106:20 Keep (3] 11:22 58:12 89: 6 62:1-2 63:18 66:18 67: Maintained [1] 15:8 9-10 71:14 72:21 73i2,5, Misunderstandings [1] 7:

Major [1] 66:15 KJq A(9] 56:14 60:9 77:21- 7,11,14 75:'20-21 76:2-3, 3.2 87:22 107:17,22 124:18 13 77:17 78:3,8 79:9,17, Majority (1] 39:2 Man [1] 97:9 13 Mitigating [1] 129:10 21 81:8-9,17,22 82:1 83: Moment (4] 65:18 72:4 74:

S(1] 59:13 14,22 84:4,6,13,17,19 85: Managed [3] 15:10 39:9 9 134:9 jD~ [1] 78:2 2,4,7,16,18 86:13,15 87: 43:17 Monday R1] 58:7 Kept_12] 20:13 111:1 2,6,17-18,21 88:2,4,13, Management (15] 1:4 2:8

( [4] 103:19 108:11 Money [1] 117:7 dl 17 89:3,7,18-19 90:2,4,6, 3:5,20 6:12 16:15 18:16 Month nl 127:Ir 11r 11 1i I:;-

I 14-15 84:16 87:11 92:11 Morning [14] 3:1 22:4 Notice [91 20:5 40:20 48: 16 43:4,7,13 46:6,9,13, 29:15 57:21-22 73:16 77: 22 114:7 128:4-5,16-17 94:11 95:4,8 96:5 97:9 16,21 47:2,17 52:17 72:4 12 80:13 92:1,8 94:12-13 129:4 98:1,4 100:1 101:14 102: 83:9,11 90:10,13 91:11 98:10 106:16 Notified [5] 16:14 70: 20 103:4 105:11 111:9,19 92:11 93:14,17 94:8 113:

Mornings [1] 96:19 19 71:3,7 118:9 112:5,11 113:7 115:14 11,18 116:6,8 119:10,16, Most [11] 10:10,16 36:5, November [4] 31:21 32: 116:7,9 118-1 120:2 123: 20 120:5,20 123:17,22 10 37:1 39:14 49:11 50:8 15 38:18 77:9 17 127:8,22 128:3,16 129: 124:5 125:21 126:9,16,20 20 130:11,22 131:15 134: 130:12,21 135:14 136:16 69:1,3 83:5 NPS [6] 15:15 58:5 59:2 18 135:19 Penalties [1] 8:13 Motive E1] 133:8 73:19 84:6 99:6 Ones [2] 37:10 112:14 Penalty (9] 128:6,8,19-Motives (3] 106:8 107:8 NRC (19] 2:1 3:19 4:13 9:

5 11:2,18 13:22 14:8,15 Open (6] 10:21 20:13 59: 20,22 129:2,5,12-13 113:9 16:4 31:12 39:21 40:1 52: 16 85:13 111:1 136:10 People [42] 10:12 20:10 Mouth [2] 20:13 111:2 19 113:12 131:19-21 132:2 Opened [1] 17:13 26:22 31:15 36:18 37:9 Mouthing [1] 93:8 NSIR [2] 5:5-6 Opening [3] 7:2 9:17,19 41:4 45:1 50:5 54:14,16, Move [2] 11:8 123:6 Nuclear [29] 1:2,4-5,9- Operate (1] 41:22 20 57:3,11,13 60:7 61:1, Moved [1] 31:6 7 62:10,19 64:6 67:10 68:

10,14 2:8,3"0,13 3:4-5,19 Operating [1] 7:4 Mudslinging [1] 93:7 18 70:11 76:1,4,7 84:5 4:17 5:18 6:12 33:19 39: Opinion [7] 55:17-18 92:

Multiple [3] 98:9 99:9 85:22 89:14 93:8 95:18 13 49:21 50:1,9,11,18 58: 14 93:11 94:6 112:8 131:

113:3 97:21 104:10 108:18 110:

3 73:20 74:2 98:3 118:7, 20 Murder El] 117:i9 12 1,19 112:3,9 117:18 122:

Opinioned (1] 26:18 X uscle [1E 109:17 11 Number [4] 45:8 80:12 opinions [1] 131:18 Must [1] 37:20 Per [1] 98:9 120:1 121:15 Opportunities [1] 33:11 N Perceived [2] 16:11 36:9 Numerous [2] 10:12 95:11 Opportunity [12] 8:11 Nail [1] 79:5 Percentage [1] 36:18 0 35:17 62:6 75:3 87:19 88:

Nam*e [6] 33:13 52:22 58: Perfectly [1] 109:3 O'clock [2] 1:6 92:6 8 100:7 111:16 115:16 1 63:6 64:16 113:8 128:12 135:17 136:15 Performance [2] 54:9 Oath [2] 101:10 124:20 121:16 Names [6] 11:11 12:7 57: Opposed [1] 27:19 1 64:16 75:17 130:19 Objection E1] 7:17 Performed (5] 18:9 24:

Option [2] 128:21 129:1 National [1] 49:13 Objective [E] 63:8 11 66:1-2,4 Objectives (3] 10:8 12: Options [1] 128:17 Nature [5] 9:2 10:5 74:8 Performing [I] 22:19 17 14:20 Order [4] 128:7-8 129:12-84:18 130:4 Pergande (2] 4:15 Obligations [1] 15:5 13 Necessarily 12] 36:19 Perhaps [I] 100:19 Observation (7] 3:10 93: Ordering [2] 18:8 129:12 41:11 Period [10] 30:4,15,17 15,17 108:13 122:16,22 Organization [7] 30:2, Need [12] 11:5 26:8 45:7 32:19 35:8,15 38:1 50:2 123:15 21 38:6 39:4 41:2 42:15 50:5 74:9 107:12 115:8 51:15 124:13 Observations [4] 17:12 43:17 118:12 128:14 129:22 130: Original (4] 15:13,17 Periodically [1] 49:16 4 136:8 18:10 54:9 108:7 Permissible [1] 94:5 Observed [2] 76:19 96:6 77:19 100:19 Needed [7] 26:6 42:10,14 Ought [1] 81:10 Person [9] 32:2 58:2 64:

63:15 64:3,9,13 Observers El] 4:13 21 86:2,9 96:11-12 114:1 Obtain [1] 11:3 Out-briefing [1] 51:11 Needs [2] 48:18 122:10 116:21 Obtained [2] 15:6 52:5 Outage [3] 37:8.11,14 Negative [2] 59:11 92:20 Personal (4] 11:19 12:

Negatives E1] 59:19 obvious [1] 107:2 Outline (2] 38:13 39:20 12 108:13 130:4 obviously [5] 9:11 105: Outside [1] 54:11 Neurauter [2] 4:14 Personally (1] 123:19 Never [12] 57:10 68:19 21 127:9 128:3 133:4 Outsider [2] 63:8,10 Personnel [2] 73:21 130:

77:12 98:2,11 99:1,9 100: Occasion [2] 16:10 77:12 Overall [5] 36:22 38:9 7 12 110:6 116:16 117:2 Occasionally [2] 98:21 44:11 60:15 95:19 Perspective [4] 6:20 8:

125:8 110:2 Overlap [1] 66:6 14 11:11 94:9 New (3] 17:15 63:10 86:10 Occasions (3] 87:8 110: Own 14] 80:21 90:22 115: Pertain [1] 3:6 News [1] 105:10 10 111:17 6,10 Pervasive [2] 97:11,19 Next [7] 7:8 8:19 33:1,6 Occur [1] 89:1 Owner [1] 134:20 Ph se [2] 70:14 73:13

12 127:15 Occurred [8] 10:17 68: [3] 77:7-8 98:7

[17] 56:5,7,10- 11 76:19 81:10 87:2 135: P.m. [1] 111:8 Pone (1] 111:10

ý1 S : ,16 59:1,4,7 62:1- 12 136:1,4 PAGE [1] 137:3 Physical [4] 2:4 4:20

~2] 1 64:8-9 124:15 60:2.124: October [1] 79:2 Paragraph (1] 135:15 87:20 121'-16 Odor (57] 16:11,16,19 17: Pardon [1] 51:1 Pickens (2] 6:4 -

3 18:5,9,14,18 19:14,16, 1!

Night [5] 91:21 92:6 102:

3 104:9,15 18,20 20:3,15 21:2 25:1, 14 28:16,19 29:2-3 41:6 Part [18] 7:19 12:11 13:

4 45:10 52:13 55:14 58:3 73:16 79:16 80:17 96:7 Picnic [1] 116:16 Picture [1] 95:10 45:4,7,16 46:3,15 48:17, Piece [4] 27:14-15 124:

NMC [49] 2:12,15-17,19 5: 99:5 117:10 118:20 124:7 21 49:3 52:1 53:13 54:15 19 125:6 15-16,20 6:5,11 7:8 8:4 126:6 132:15 133:1 55:3,11,21 57:9 59:4 60: Pieces [1] 124:9 9:21 13:22 14:12,21 15:7 Partially (2] 18:1 99:20 17:10 19:2-3,12 22:1,5, 9-10 62:15 67:11,15 70: Pin [1] 10:9 12 76:18 77:7,14 93:1 98:

Participants (2] 3:16 Place [14] 27:8 66:18 67:

13 23:3 25:9 28:18 30:1 11:18 39:19 40:1,15 42:16,18, 11 99:2,11 108:17 109:11 8 71:13 82:10,15-16 85:

121:2,11 123:3,19 Particular [4] 8:1 33: 11,20 87:9-10 90:3 111:9 21-22 43:3,5 44:9 45:20 16,43:20 61:10 46:20 48:17 52:4,9,20 63: Offer E1] 72:10 137:13 Offering [2] 72:16,20 Particularly [3] 20:4 Placed [2] 70:7,9 7 84:2 94:3 95:13 108:15 67:11,14 Plant [61 2:10,13 5:18 NMC's [2] 14:9,15 Office' [11] 1:22 4:8 5:1, 3 53:1 63:18 77:12 81:19 Parties [4] 97:5 107:5 41:22 73:21 79:12 Nobody [5] 11:8 87:21 88:

'111:19 133:6 13 90:7 105:6 85:8 127:17-18 Players [1] 47:5 Offices [2] 82:17 127:18 Parts [1] 17:18 Non-nuclear [4] 50:3,9, Plenty (1] 75:3 18 98:2 01 [4] 4:19 56:4 60:2 66: Party [I] 97:2 Plus [1] 93:22 None [2] 16:13 114:17 3 Past E1] 118:21 PM [2] 83:21 96:17 Normally [1] 113:22 Old [1] 91:20 Pat [1] 4:3 Point [65] 8:6 12:9,20 Notary [2] 1:12 137:7 On-site [2] 81:13 104:14 PATRICK [1] 2:3 20:9 24:1 30:20,22 31:7 Notei[S] 8:22 27:7,11 37: Once (1] 127:21 Paul [2] 4:19 32:17 34:6 36:5,13 37:1, 20 115:11 One [60] 11:1 14:1 '17:15 Pay El] 128:22 9,17 39:1-3 40:6,20 42:

Notes [10] 30:12 65:17 19:22 23:14,16 26:7 28:1 Pedersen (1] 3:1 17 43:11,13,16,20 44:5-6, 111:7 114:1,4-5,9 115:4, 29:2 31:3-4 46:22 47:3 PEDERSON [551 1:15 3:1 14 46:10,17 49:14 55:8

81:4,21 82:21 84:16,21 Process [12] 7:15 8:20 Random [7] 22:8,11,17,19 3 108:7,19 109:18 113:4 86:21 89:13 94:16-17 95: 15:3 39:15 66:7 118:20 23:19 24:11 95:6 Regardless [2] 106:8 6 100:2 101:7 108:4 110: 119:6 120:14 126:22 129: Randy E11] 5:20 12:21 19: 107:8 6,15,18 118:5,14 123:6, 16 132:16 133:19 8.44:17 82:12 107:15 108: Region [10] 1:10 3*:3 4:1, 12 124:5 127:9 129:19 Professional [2] 93:10 20 121:1 122:8,20 123:8 4,6,9,11,14 127:17,22 133 :12 113:21 Range [1] 34:18 Regional [4] 1:17,19 3:

Pointed [1] 101:1 Program (26] 1:20 3:8 4: Rate (3] 36:16,22 37:3 22 4:2 Points [21 29:22 81:15 12 6:1 17:10 18:7 29:17, Rated [Il 33:20 Regular [4] 31:3 96:8, Policy [15] 3:10 7:3-4 8: 19 40:6 42:12 45:3,5,11, Rather [2] 73:18 124:7 22 105:6 11 17:5,7 18:12 41:6 51: 22 49:5 56:1 58:9 121:1, Regulatory [12] 1:2,5,9-Rationalize [1] 41:4 10 52:12 84:8,11 120:14 13 122:2,13,22 123:2,20 10,14 2:13,21 3:4 6:6,9 132:2 135:4 124":3 127:18 Re [3] 1:3 64:19 87:16 9:12,15 Polygraph [1] 116:19 Program's [1] 122:14 Re-interview [2] 75:20 Reiterate [1] 133:11 Project' (21 31:5 98:22 87:16 Pool E1l 44:15 Reiterated [1M .111:14 Re-interviewed [1] 25:4 Population (2] 37:7 49: Projects E1] 2:3 Reiterates [1] 23:4 15 Re-interviewing [1] 26:

Properly [2] 93:1 133:18 Rejoining [1] 120:7 Portal E1] 95:3 11 Proposed [5] 128:6,9,19 Relate [1] 63:3 Re-investigation [1] *64:

Position (6] 11:2 127: 129:3 132:15 Related [11] 15:7 17:16-19 20-21 128:1 131:22 132:13 Proprietary [1] 130:3 17 39:17 40:14 41:12,17-Positions [1] 11:11 Reach [1] 134:7 Protected [6] 16:13 59: 18 63:16 109:21 121:17 Reaction (1] 120:10 Positive [8] 34:16-17, 9,14 84:7 102:9 110:1 Relates [1] 120:20 20 48:11-12 50:22 51:3,18 Reactor [3] 1:16 2:3 3:2 Provide [14] 3:8 8:21 Relating (1] 107:5 Possession [1] 11:2 13:22 14:8,15,18 17:11 Read (10] 45:13 100:20 101:18 102:11 104:1 114: Relations [1] 49:11 Possibilities (1] 128:3 19:8 29:1 37:2 51:16 119: Relative [2] 14:12 17:12 12-13 121:15 8,15 130:6 131:15 134:17 Possible [1] 78:17 Release (1] 128:9 Provided (22] 14:11 17: Reader [1] 115:15 Possibly [2] 128:7 129: Relevance (2] 31:17 32:

11 15 18:21 20:2,4,7 24:19 Readily (1] 51:20 18 Potential [21] 8:3 9:6- 31:12 34:5'35:19 40:1 52: Ready [1] 73:5 6 66:12,17 67:7 107:8 Relevant 14] 8:9 29:17 8 12:13 13:14 14:16,18 Real [2] 12:20 95:10 132:9 134:3,12 135:1,10, 30:1431:1 15:18 29:12 30:1 31:21 Reality [1] 105:14 20 Reliability [1] 17:2 32:10 36:8 38:5,14 40:8 Really [16] 10:22 17:5 Reliable [1] 99:12 134:10-11 135:22 Provides [2) 33:11 36:21 21:20 27:17 35:19 41:21 Providing [2] 100:15 68:16 83:5 96:11 108:8 Relied (1] 93:14 Potentially [5] 3:12 9:

133:8 111:7 112:9 118:2 129:18. Relies (1] 9:12 10 32:13 34:6 134:19 Proximity El] 98:10 133:12 136:2 Reluctance [1] 40:13 Power [4] 2:10,13 .58:3 73:20 Psychopaths [1] 117:18 Reason (10] 20:14,20 24: Remaining [1] 50:2 Practice [E] 120:9 Public (41 1:12 3:10 131: 16 75:7 96:14 98:12 99:2, Remark (2] 95:1 130:13 Prairie [1] 44:8 1 137:7 10 118:3,5 Remarks [6] 7:2 8:21 9:

Pre-access [4] 48:10 51: Pull [4] 108:9 119:1 126: Reasonable [5] 10:17 15: 18-19 120:15 132:6 4,9,13 18 136:7 1 64:6 112:15 113:4 Remember [61 43:16,18 Pre-Decisional [1] 1:4 Pulled [1] 95:4 Reasons [41 20:2,4,7 28: 57:6 82:2 101:14 102:13 Predecisional (6] 3:3 6: Pulling [1] 32:14 14 Reminder (1] 45:22 18 101:21 118:9 129:19 Purpose [7] 6:15 10:6-7 Receipt (2] 67:13 71:11 Removed [1] 24:20 132:14 12:15-16 13:21 116:17 Receive [1] 76:15 Replacement (2] 31:5 37:

Preliminary [1] 118:19 Purposeful [1] 5:9 Received [4] 54:20 68: 14 Preparation [3] 26:1 61: Put [7] 30:11 45:22 65: 15 105:19 136:3 Report [43] 14:2,5 16:21 20 71:21 21 66:5 '70:12,20 94:9 Receiving [1] 24:22 17:3 19:20 20:1,20 21:17, Puts [1] 45:18 Recently [1] 25:19 20 32:1 33:18 35:13 38:

Prepared [2] 11:12 69:14 Present [11] 1:14 2:1,8 Putting (1] 86:11 Recess [3] 119:18,21 120: 17 40:11 41:6 45:3 46:14 Puzzled E1] 23:8 3 47:15 49:9 53:17-18,20 8:8 10:6 13:12,14 51:11 54:3,14 58:11 62:19 66:

85:9 133:20 135:18 a Recognize [1] 41:19 13.69:15 70:12 105:4 110:

Presentation [11] 7:9 8: Qualified [2] 1:12 137:7 Recognized [1] 94:18 11,13 112:4,9,17 114:21 15 9:20 11:8,16,12:22 13: Qualify [1] 48:3 Recollection [2] 36:16 115-13 122:17-18 126:12 4 21:9 53:11 62:13 131:5 Quality El] 133:2 81:6 131:6 137:12 Presenting. [I1 9:2 Questioned [3] 76:2 78: Reconcile [3] 132:12,20 Report's [1] 126:13 President [5] 2:10-11, 11 125:8 134:3 Reported [34] 16:4 18:

18 5:19 6:11 Questioning [3] 73:13 Reconfirm [1] 119:4 14,18 19:17 21:3,15 25:8 Press [1] 128:9 74:5,11 Reconvene [1] 8:17 27:5 28:16,19 29:3 35:7 Pressed [1] 116:14 Questionnaire [1] 49:4 Record [4] 23:20 109:10 38:16 46:15 52:2 53:13 Pretty [1] 134:1 Questions [27] 8:16,18 120:6 131:13 54:16 55:3 68:19 75:6 76:

Previous (4] 24:1 31:12 11:8 12:21 52:20-21 53:1 Records [5] 23:18 81:12 5 78:9 83:7 85:8 87:22 115:4 119:5 55:6,9 58:6 60:1,10,21 82:4 95:5 94:14 103:17 104:12 110:

Previously El] 39:21 61:5,9,16 107:11 113:11, Redirect [1] 106:1 8 115:8 12.1:21 133:15 Primarily [4] 38:18 39: 13,20 116:6 119:17 125: Reference (8] 44:11 65: 137:9 2,7 42:11 22 132:1 133:11 135:16 19 66:21 79:6 81:18 85: Reporting (17] 19:16 20:

Primary [3] 19:21 42:8 136:12 20 125:4,13 3 21:1 25:13 38:6,14 39:

Wuixn 13] 38:12,16 39:3 Referenced [2] 76:17 6 40:9 41:2 45:6,16,18 Principals [1] 33:22 Quinn'.* [2] 39:16 49:9 46:3 49:3 50:4 121:2,14 Print (2] 78:2 131:8 121:19 Reports [5] 25:1 54:20 Privacy [4] 11:19 12:13 ,Xote [13] 53:13 54:1,15 Referred [4] 61:13 67:

69:13,16 113:5 130:4,18 55:11 56:12-13 68:15 94: 20 100:13 130:6 12 97:22 101:17.102:11 Representative [4] 34:4 Privately (1] 79:13 Referring [4] 63:17 67:

104:1 108:12 36:19 122:7 131:21 Problem [20] 13:4 38:5, 17 98:17 101:12 Quote-unquote [3] 68:15 Representatives [2] 50:

14 39:6 40:9-10 41:1 50: Refers [4] 78:6 100:21 97:22 108:12 11 52:19 3 65:2 75:8 90:8 92:22 101:1,5 Quotes [1] 59:6 Reprisal [1] 21:1 199:15 103:21 105:4 106:3, Refused [1] 74:3 R

Reputation (2] 92:18 93:

10 107:13 112:20 122:19 Regard (2] 7:5 91:14 8

Procedure [1] 49:7 Raise [2] 40:14 106:16 Regarding [20] 14:1,9 Request [3] 31:13 58:3 Proceed [1] 73:7 Raised [5] 32:11,19-20 21:10 23:6 24:14 25:10,

-in le Af.' A0.41 - -

127:12

Required [3] 41:6 50:4 30:3,15 33:7,19 40:2,14 16 51:17 71:6 81:12 82:1, Start [4] 3:18 52:20 68:

121:5 118:14 129:14,16 3-4 84:1 91:14 94:22 95: 10 125:11 Requirements (1] 9:13 Sample (1] 37:7 21 97:13 104:14 122:7 Started [2] 27:20 68:11 Requires [1] 121:14 Sat (1] 116:11 Sites [4] 42:22 45:15 46: Starting [1] 27:20 Research (21 51:19 70:10 Scope (1] 73:16 2 94:5 State [7] 1:13 7:16 51:2 Researching El] 69:11 Scuttlebutt [1] 93:7 Situation [1] 22:9 87:20 137:1,8 Residual [2] 92:9 93:1 Seated [3] 56:12 124:15 Six [1] 127:7 Statement [36] 22:2,6, Resolved [1] 119:1 Second [12] 13:9 20:2 22: Slide [1] 44:11 17 23:8 24:4 25:13,16 26:

Respect [11] 23:11 28:' 8 23:10,22 27:15 30:5,18 Slides [1] 41:3 15 28:8 45:12 58:15 64i 12 44:22 48:4,6,17 107: 102:18 103:12 124:19 131: Slightly [2] 40:4 90:3 13 67:15 74:14 76:8 79:6, 22 108:16,21-22 124:3 a 4 [1) 124:16 11,13,21 81:8,16 83:6 93:

Secondly [2] 120:11 135: Slips [1] 130:10 15 95:9 104:19 105:10,16, Respond [1] 67:1 5 Slurred (3] 49:1 121:18 20 107:20 111:22 112:11-Responded (5] 34:1 36:

Section [1] 118:18 12 125:9 131:16,20,22 18 59:5,11,15 123:4 Security [7] 2:4,6 4:10, Statements [26] 10:13-Responding [1] 128:15 Slurring [1] 91:18 20 22:5,13 23:3 14 21:6 22:1,21 24:14 26:

Responds [1i 5:7 Small (1] 36:17 See [15] 5:7 40:21 41:1 10 68:20 69:1 79:10 80:

Response [13] 19:3 22: Smell [35] 25:8 48:18 58: 13 81:2 95:12 99:21 105:

65:8 89:22 91:18 98:4 11 59:4,9,11,13,18 60:2, 22 31:12 34:12 36:16,22 18 111:20 112:2,6,13 113:

100:19 115:16 119:3 120: 22 72:19 80:1 84:8 87:19 37:3 39:22 40:16 50:14 1-2 119:17 122:12 131:17 12 122:22 131:4 136:5-6 89:12,14 90:16 91:20 92:

74:10 75:7 125:12 133:6 136:1 Seem [1] 124:7 9,18,21 96:14,18 97:10, Responses [3] 34:17,21 States [4] 1:2,9-10 84:10 Seemingly [1] 31:16 14 109:18-19,22 111:15 42:5 Stating (2] 22:3 81:7 Responsibilities [2] 16: Self (1] 30:1 115:3 116:1 121:17 Self-identified [1] 30:1 Smelled (21] 5*6:20 57:5, Station [1] 58:3 20 45:12 Statistical [1] 37:4 Rest E11 26:21 Senior [1] 127:22 12 73:1,3,6 74:18 76:2,5 Sense [1] 95:9 85:1,3,5 87:22 97:13 98: Statistically [2] 37:6, Restrict (1] 130:4 Sent [(] 117:8 2 103:18 110:2-3,5,9 125: 19 Result [18] 10:11 14:16 15 Steam (1] 37:13 16:22 17:22 19:2 29:13 Sentence W1] 125:12 Smelling [3] 59:16 62: Steward [1] 49:18 34:4,11 35:12 38:9 40:16 Separate [1] 100:8 18 97:20 Still [6] 10:4 63:10 93:

41:11,13 48:11 52:10 71: September [8] 30:16 31:

Smells [3] 79:20 123:9 1 101:21 118:3 132:15 22 126:3 15 33:14,17 35:11,15,17 37:12 Smoking [1] 100:15 Stood [1] 115:18 Results [11] 12:18 15:

Sequence (1] 10:17 Sniff [1] 20:17' Stopped [2] 77:11 79:1 11 16:8 40:2 44:2,8,12 51:18 98:6,14 114:2 Series [2] 91:6 112:5 So's [1) 122:2 Story [1] 133:9 Retained E2] 15:19 16:1 Seriously [4] 9:6 10:2 Social [1] 121:16 Stream [1] 42:13 Retaliation (2] 36:8-9 65:12 118:10 Socialized [1] 92:4 Studies [1] 41:8 Return (2] 11:18,20 Seriousness (1] 15:18 Someone [3] 53:16 73:22 Study [1) 44:2 Returning [1] 130:14 Service 12] 84:22 89:3 Stuff [1] 102:22 Revealed C31 14:1,9 80: Services [5] 2:21 6:9 Sometimes (1] 39:12 Stumbling El] 97:3 11 15:20 33:10 40:5 Somewhat [3) 8:1 98:22 Stupak [3) 1:12 137:6,19 Reverse [1] 37:6 Serving [1] 29:19 132 :6 Subject [2] 74:7 127:5 Review (161 8:11 23:18 Set (2] 102:7 137:13 Sorry [11] 13:2,11 56:22 Submit (51 126:5,7,10 33:9 40:2 66:4 87:17 118: Setup [1] 26:17 58:14 64:15 72:14 75:16 131:7 132:20 20 119:3 120:16 121:11 Several [5] 15:3 46:17 104:3 125:1,11 130:9 Submitted [2) 12:10 126:

126:4 127:19 128:12 133: 55:9 58:8 77:3 Sort [6] 48:3 106:18 107: 6 1 135:13 Shake [1] 9:14 9 128:7,10 132:10 Subsequent [4] 22:4.,12 Reviewing [1] 65:16 Shall [1] 119:13 Sounded [1] 86:10 26:4 48:8 Reviews [1] 43:8 Share [3] 113:22 122:6 Sounds [1] 116:20 Substantial [1] 30:11 Rie'1+[] 4:19 130:11 Source [2] 59:8 77:5 Substantiate [7] 18:17 Rights [2] 45:11 129:14 Shared (1] 107:4 Sources [2] 80:22 113:3 28:16,19 29:8 52:1 95:5-6 (10] 20:16.23:15,17- Shaun [1] 4:15 South [1] 109:17 Substantiated (31 17:20 1 , 70:6 96:11,13,16 Shoals [1] 109:17 Speaking [5] 11:15 12:6 18:1,13 97:5 " Shop [3] 102:6,8 134:22 33:6 34:6 88:2 Substantiates [W] 62-4 Ripe [6] 22:22 23:9 24:4, Short [4] 8:16 113:19 Speaks (2] 38:19 100:5 Sufficient (1] 37:4 9 94:19 95:1 119:18,21 Special [2] 25:21 135:9 Suggest [2] 11:17 .131:6 Risk [1] 45:19 Shorthand E1] 137:9 Specialist [3] 1:22 2:6 Suggested [2] 60:13 110:

Road [11 1:11 Show (3] .10:18 14:20 127: 4:5 5 Rob [(] 99:6 8 Specific [15] 20:2,7 30: Suggesting (1] 60:19 Rod El] 26:20 Showed [2] 104:16,21 14,18 43:9 44:13 60:5 61: Suggestion [1] 58:9 Rogoff [32] 2:11 5:16 12: Shut [2] 20:13 111:2 16 76:17 77:3 90:14 108: Suggests [1] 109:20 5 43:1 63:9 72:12 77:15 Side [21 51:12 133:8 6,18 120:10 122:16 Sum [2] 55:15 76:21 78:14 81:4 82:12 87:15 Sides E1] 80:10 Specifically (13] 7:16 Summarize (5] 7:6 8:19 88:6 98:16 100:1,11 101: 8:2 29:1 32:7 34:1 45:3 83:3 120:12 124:6 Sign [4] 28:7 45:13 91:3, 8,18,22 102:11 104:1 105: 64:7 70:10 71:4 90:20 Summarized (2] 16:4 135:

7 1,5 107:15 108:20 119:12 110:12 130:13,19 Signed (7] 27:7,9 28:10 14 126:15 130:5,9,19,22 131: Specified [1] 124:21 Summary [5] 28:12 40:12 91:8 125:9 126:1-2 10 Speech [4] 49:1 91:18 51:22 90:11 132:7 Significance [3] 7:11 9:

Rolled [1) 31:5 121:18 123:4 .+/-9nday (1] PA-1.6 4 37:5 Room [3] 110:16 117:6 Spelled [1] 119:5 Significant [7] 37:7,19- Superintendentl [13] 14:

119:22 20 64:20 115:14 116:4 Spend [1] 21:17 1,11 18:6,11*,zl 19:13,18 Rooted (1] 41:9. 128:11" Spent W11 29:4 24:22 25:17 26:10 48:3 Rule [2] 36:7 116:3 Signing [1] 91:9 Squeezed [1] 116:22 52:3,14 Rumor [1] 97:15 Signs (3] 48:22 104:16,21 SS (1] 137:2 Superior [1] 34:13 Running [1] 97:6 Similar [1] 42:5 Staff [7] 1:18 8:8 25:19 Supervised [1] 92:19 S Simply [4] 20:16,22 83:1 40:5,8 51:17 131:19 Supervision [14] 20:3, Safeguards (21 1:20 4":11 128:4 Staffing [1] 37:14 15,18 29:1 35:8,14 45:4, Safely 11] 42:1 Site [28] 2:10 5:19 9:8 Stand [1] 115:20 7,17 46:'15 109:9 110:9 22:11.14 23:5 24:9.14 41: Stand-alone rl1 48:19 122:19 .2i

15 16:14 18:15 25:21 73: 102:7 117:5-6 124:9 134: Two [43] 15:6 16:6 17:15, Vehicles [1] 46:1 21-22 74:1 77:8 92:15 22 18-19 19:21 29:22 43:8 Verifiable [2) 81:11,15 106:12 123:18 Three-unit [2] 43:17 44: 54:20 56:12 57:3,13 60:7 Verify [1] 88:20 Supervisors (2] 36:4 7 61:1,7 63:21 65:1 69:13 Version [3] 90:4,21 126:

114:22 Throat (1] 92:22 74:17 76:1,6,14 78:9,18 2 Supplement [1] 65:15 Throughout [5] 15:9 30: 79:9,19 80:2 82:14 83:7 Versus [2] 46:10 80:14 Supplemental [8] 16:7 4 46:20 77:1 115:3 85:22 86:12 87:7 94:10 Via [1] 83:22 17:13-66:1 67:18 68:14 Tie. [1i 131:1" 106:7 109:14 110:1,3,10 111:16,19 126:7 134:18-19 Vice [5] 2:10-11,18 5:19 69:8, 10,15 Ties [2] 23:22 36:1 6:11 Supplementary [1] 17:8 Type [4] 35:12 42:20 43:

Title [1] 6:17 Video [1] 3:17 Support [7] 17:5-6 19:5 2 106:14 Titled [(] 100:12 View [4] 20:9 63:8 110:

31:3 42:22 52:15 112:1 Typically [2) 68:22 69:3 15,18 Titles [1] 49:19 Supporting [1] 19:12 Typo [1] 30:9 Today [15] 6:20 7:14 9:5 Viewed [2] 131:19,21 Supports [1] 49:16 10:7,18 11:4,15 13:21 14: U Violates [1] 9:14 Suppose [1] 53:22 20 105:17 119:4 127:4 Ultimately [6] 21:4 28:

Violation [20] 84:7,11 Supposedly [1] 75:21 130:2 133:17 134:2 13,15 29:6 32:5 109:8 106:2 118:20 120:10,17 SUPURSIS [1] 5:5 Today's (31 3:18 6:15 Unable [8] 18:4 28:15,18 128:5,16-18,20,22 129:2, Surface [1] 43:3 127:6 . 29:6-7 61:15,18 112:22 4 133:17 134:10-11 135:3 Surfaced [1]. 69:5 Together (10] 23:16 36: Unacceptable [1] 34:18 136:4 Surprise [1] 80:19 1 43:19 65:21 66:5 86:11 Unaware [2] 60:13 84:10 Violations [12] 3:6,12 Surprising [2] 75:9-10 95:4 126:18 127:i9 136:8 Uncle [2] 84:20 92:19 7:7,17 9:6 10:6 14:19 52:

Surrounding [1] 15:2 Tolerance [1] 48:16 Uncommon [1) 96:18 11 127:4 129:11 134:16-17 Survey [13] 33:10,14 34: Tolerate [1] 41:21 Uncorroborated [4] 21:6 Visited [1] 74:16 1,7,11 35:10,18 36:18 37: Tolerated [1] 9:16 23:12,22 112:6 Volume [1] 42:11 10,12 43:4-5 Tom [7] 5:18 9:17 12:5 Uncovered [2] 17:1 135: Voluntarily EL] 72:16 Surveyed [1] 34:9 44:21 70:10 118:15 125:22 18 Volunteer [1] 73:3 Suspect [1] 116:14 Tomorrow [1] 126:15 Under [5] 7:4 56:1 101: w Swore [1] 117:1 Took [16] 27:8 30:3 35: 10 124:20 130:17 Wait [2] 12:20 53:4 Sworn [2) 125:7 133:5 22 36:3 37:17 38:7 41:14 Underscore [1] 45:15 47:13 48:7 66:18 68:20 Waiting [1] 65:20 Synergy [4] 33:10,18 43: Underscored [2] 45:6 49:

82:10,15-16 85:11 135:3 2 Walk [1] 85:8 5 44:1 Walker [63] 2:20 6:2 15:

Top [2] 32:14 135:7 Underscoring [2] 46:2 Synergy's [1] 33:10 21-22 20:8 26:3 55:5,7 Topic [1] 31:13 49:6 Synopsis [2] 83:2-3 56:6 57:16,20-21 58:1,14, Total [4] 47:13 55:16 76: Understandable [1] 61:8 Systems [1] 38:12 20,22 59:20,22 60:13 '61:

21 85:10 Understood (3] 21:19 89:

T 3 65:15-16 66:11 67:1 69:

Tough [1] 11:21 5 106:9 10,13 72:6,14 74:19 75:3, Table [4] 15:22 61:21 78: Track E1] 11:22 Undertaken [1] 17:9 10,14 78:1 81:1 83:12-13, 15 117:10 Traditional [1] 7:4 Undertook [1] 45:22 19 85:15,19 86:5,8,17,22 Tack [1] 134:9 Trailer [6] 56:11 60:6, Unearthed (1] 32:5 87:5,12 95:16-17.22 103:

Talks [2] 100:22 118:18 14,19 124:14 Unescorted [2] 118:4,6 5-6,8,10 109:14 113:19 Telephone [2] 83:22 109: Trained [1] 20:1 Unfettered [1] 63:12 114:2,6,11 115:20 134:13 16 Training [2] 49:5 96:8 Unfit (10] 9:8 18:3 32:1, 135:8 Terms [3] 50:8 77:2 108: Transcribed [1] 101:10 6-7 59:3 75:6 77:690:17 Walker's [E] 98:14 17 Transcribing [1] 3:11 95:21 Warrenville [1) 1:11 Terry [6] 2:4 4:9 6:4 7: Transcript .[1] 137:11 Unfitness [1] 95:15 Watch [1] 93:3 6 51:20 120:16 Transcriptionist [1] 3: Unfolded (2] 29:18,21 Water [1] 53:3 Test [25] 18:8 22:11,19 is ,.... I... Unfortunately [1] 83:4

[3] 20:9 110: Waves (2] 20:13 111:1 23:18-19,21 48:10-12 49:

Uninvolved [1] 133:6 Ways [1] 53:19 4 51:4,9,13,18 92:12-13 76-17 *-4 Union [7] 20:10 21:1 39: Week [1] 126:17 93:19 94:2 95:6 106:18 Treated El] 28:3 108:14 122:3,9 123:7,20 10 49:12,18 110:17-18 Weeks [3] 100:5 127:7 Tremendous .[1] 80:12 Unique [4] 8:1 39:12-13 134:19 Tested [11] 23:18 50:22 51:3 72:17-18 73:5,7 92:

Tried [1] 83:3 98:12 Weight [1] 133:7 20 96:13,15 97:19 Trigger (4] 37:6 122:3 Unit [1] 43:17 Weighting [1] 133:3 Testified [1] 124:20 123:7,20 united [3] 1:2,9-10 Weil [42] 1:18 4:5 7:2 8:

Testimony [9] 1.:8 56:17 Triggered, [1] 60:11 Unless [4] 12:19 104:21 18 31:14 32:9,17 33:3 35:

60:2 86:6 103:1 124:12 Triggers [1] 121:12 105:11 131:3 4 36:5 59:21 86:19,21 87:

125:7 137:9,12 Troubling [1] 83:5 Unquote [9] 53:13 54:3, 9,13 101:7,9,20 102:1,5, Testing [10] 18:13 22:9 True [3] 57:12 77:18 137: 15 55:12 56:15 68:15 97: 13,17,20 103:2,9 113:16, 11 22 108:12 124:18 19 114:4,7 115:5,18 116:

23:2,7 24:7,15 72:11,21 95:5 96:7 Truly ['1] 77:5 Unsigned [2] 68:15 125: 5 117:10,14 127:1 131:6, Tests [1] 24:11 Trust [1] 9:14 13 13,15 132:4 134:9,18 Thanksgiving [1] 86:5 Trustworthiness (1] 17:1 Unsteady [3] 48:22 121: Weinkam [3] 2:21 6:8 That-he-said [1] 24:21 Trustworthy [I] 9:13 18 123:3 Welcome [1] 132:21 Themselves [1] 39:8 Truth (1] 117:1 Unwillingness E1] 32:1 Welder [5] 18:14 21:3,14 Thereabouts [1] 72:22 Truthful [3] 69:1,3 116: Up [27] 13:20 17:14 25:3 28:13 73:19 Therefore [2] 3:12 20:19 21 28:2 31:5 64:12 72:10 75: Welder's [1] 21:11 Third [8] 22:16 24:18 25: Truthfulness [4] 25:12 18 77:17,21 91:22 92:1,7- Welders (14] 14:2 19:16, 15 31:11 37:16 107:5 125: 67:14 135:22 8 93:6 96:11 98:13 99:6 20,22 20:6 28:19,21 47:9, 6 135:14 Try [2] 80:17 95:14 100:7,18 105:22 117:6 11 53:22 70:3 79:19 102:

Trying [10] 65:21 66:5 119:14 122:11,21 125:2 7 134:22 THOMAS [1] 2:10 127:20 Welding [2] 17:17 58:9 Thorough [2] 14:21 89:22 79:5 80:6 84:8-9 108:5 123:13 132:22 Urban [1] 77:1 West [3] 2:6 5:6 Thoroughly [1] 17:18 Tuesday [1] 83:20 Useful [1] 7:18 What-it's-worth [1] 116:

Thoughts [2] 6:21 50:12 Turn [3) 7:8 19:7 97:7 Utilized (1] 40:4 9 Thousand E1] 116:20

[1] 21:7 Turned [4] 15:15 28:2 94: V Wherein [6] 22:9,18 24:

Threat 16 97:4 Validation [1] 122:10 2 66:20 96:13 97:17 Threatened [1] 26:21 Turns [1] 113:6 VAN [2] 2:18 6:10 Whole (3] 27:20 36:20 Three [16] 14:10 23:12 Twenty-some [1] 92:17 VanNiddlesworth [1) 6 :10 113:6 30:13 31:16 43:17 46:9 54:19 62:10 77:10 100:5 Twice [11 24:19 Various [1] 46:1 Willful [31 3:12 12:13

- I 118 :19 Willing (1] 72:17 Willingness [1] 40:10 Wished [1] 17:11 Withdrawing [1] 129:11 Withholdable [1) 130:17 Witness (2] 91:8,17 Word [1] 102:1 Worker (5] 20:21 23:15, 17 98:20 99:12 Workers El3 49:16 World [(] 117:8 Worth (2] 116:9 117:16 Wrap (13 13:20 Write (41 78:5 90:21 115:

6,13 Writes [2] 77:20,22 Writing [43 13:5 71:8 129:6,9 Written [2] 77:19 129:13 Wrote [1] 78:5 Y

Year [9] 34:7 48:10 51:6-7,15 56:18 86:10 91:9 100:4 Years (5] 25:20 84:21 92:

17,19 116:13 Z

Zero [1] 48:16 Zimmerman [32] 14:6 15:

15 16:12,19 18:2,6 30:2, 20 38:3,6-7,10-11,17 39:

1 40:3,8 42:4,11,15,18,.

21"43:9 44:14 49:13 50:

11 58:5 59:2 73:19 74:1 62:17 134:21

. ." .. . . . .. . *.." -

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML062790355&oldid=2662706"