ML19106A203

Part 5 of 5 - NRC-2018-000531_Interim 3 Response Package

ML19106A203
Person / Time
Issue date:	04/11/2019
From:	NRC/OCIO
To:
Shared Package
ML19106A205	List: ML19106A199 ML19106A200 ML19106A201 ML19106A202 ML19106A203 ML19106A204
References
FOIA, NRC-2019-000247
Download: ML19106A203 (421)

Text

{{#Wiki_filter:NRC FORM 464 Part I (04-2018)RESPONSE TO FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA) REQUEST U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION NRC RESPONSE NUMBER RESPONSE TYPE INTERIM FINAL REQUESTER: DATE: DESCRIPTION OF REQUESTED RECORDS: PART I. -- INFORMATION RELEASED The NRC has made some, or all, of the requested records publicly available through one or more of the following means: (1) https://www.nrc.gov

(2) public ADAMS, https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html

(3) microfiche available in the NRC Public Document Room; or FOIA Online, https://foiaonline.regulations.gov/foia/action/public/home

.Agency records subject to the request are enclosed. Records subject to the request that contain information originated by or of interest to another Federal agency have been referr ed to that agency (See Part I.D -- Comments) for a disclosure determination and direct response to you. We are continuing to process your request. See Part I.D -- Comments. PART I.A -- FEES AMOUNT You will be billed by NRC for the amount indicated. You will receive a refund for the amount indicated. Fees waived. Since the minimum fee threshold was not met, you will not be charged fees. Due to our delayed response, you will not be

charged search and/or duplication fees that

would otherwise be applicable to your request. PART I.B -- INFORMATION NOT LOCATED OR WITHHELD FROM DISCLOSURE We did not locate any agency records responsive to your request. Note: Agencies may treat three discrete categories of law enforcement and national security records as not subject to the FOIA (" exclusions "). See 5 U.S.C. 552(c ). This is a standard notification given to all requesters

it should not be taken to mean that any excluded records do, or do not , exist.We have withheld certain information pursuant to the FOIA exemptions described, and for the reasons stated, in Part II.

Because this is an interim response to your request, you may not appeal at this time. We will notify you of your right to appeal any of the responses we have issued in response to your request when we issue our final determination. You may appeal this final determination within 90 calendar days of the date of this response. If you submit an appeal by mail, address it to the FOIA Officer, at U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Mail Stop T-2 F43, Washington, D.C. 20555-0001. You may submit an appeal by e-mail to FOIA.resource@nrc.gov. You may fax an appeal to (301) 415-5130. Or you may submit an appeal through FOIA Online, https://foiaonline.regulations.gov/foia/action/public/home. Please be sure to include on your submission that it is a "FOIA Appeal." PART I.C -- REFERENCES AND POINTS OF CONTACT You have the right to seek assistance from the NRC's FOIA Public Liaison by submitting your inquiry at https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/ foia/contact-foia.html , or by calling the FOIA Public Liaison at (301) 415-1276.

If we have denied your request, you have the right to seek dispute resolution services from the NRC's Public Liaison or the Off ice of Government Information Services (OGIS). To seek dispute resolution services from OGIS, you may e-mail OGIS at ogis@nara.gov , send a fax to (202) 741-5789, or send a letter to: Office of Government Information Services, National Archives and Records Administ ration, 8601 Adelphi Road, College Park, MD 20740-6001. For additional information about OGIS, please visit the OGIS website at

https://www.archives.gov/ogis .2019-000531 3Jason Fagone 04/08/2019 Request: All NRC records between 2011 and the present day (May 9, 2018) involving safety concerns raised by workers at

the Hunters Point Shipyard in San Francisco, California. This request includes, but is not limited to, complaints, emails, records of phone calls, faxes, memos, and reports. This request also includes all records related to the interactions of (ctd) $0.00 NRC FORM 464 Part I (04-2018)RESPONSE TO FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA) REQUEST U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION NRC RESPONSE NUMBER RESPONSE TYPE INTERIM FINAL PART I.D -- COMMENTS Signature - Freedom of Information Act Officer or Designee 2019-000531 3Request

Description:

Request: All NRC records between 2011 and the present day (May 9, 2018) involving safety concerns raised by workers at

the Hunters Point Shipyard in San Francisco, California. This request includes, but is not limited to, complaints, emails, records of phone calls, faxes, memos, and reports. This request also includes all records related to the interactions of

Susan Andrews and Elbert Bowers with the NRC. Andrews and Bowers are former radiological control experts who worked

at the Shipyard, and they have both stated in sworn declarations that they informed the NRC of safety concerns and

violations in 2011.

Please note:

This is the best available copy. The NRC is not providing duplicates.

The agency already provided two interim responses to you, this is the third interim response.

The responsive records are provided to you in part.

We continue to process your request.

Stephanie A. Blaney Digitally signed by Stephanie A. Blaney

Date: 2019.04.08 11:21:32 -04'00' NRC FORM 464 Part II (04-2018)U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION RESPONSE TO FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA) REQUEST NRC Form 464 Part II (04-2018) NRC DATE: PART II.A -- APPLICABLE EXEMPTIONS Exemption 1: The withheld information is properly classified pursuant to an Executive Order protecting national security info rmation. Records subject to the request are being withheld in their entirety or in part under the FOIA exemption(s) as indicated below (5 U.S.C. 552(b)). Exemption 2: The withheld information relates solely to the internal personnel rules and practices of NRC. Exemption 3: The withheld information is specifically exempted from public disclosure by the statute indicated. Sections 141-145 of the Atomic Energy Act, which prohibits the disclosure of Restricted Data or Formerly Restricted Data (42 U.S.C. 2161-2165). Section 147 of the Atomic Energy Act, which prohibits the disclosure of Unclassified Safeguards Information (42 U.S.C. 2167). 41 U.S.C. 4702(b), which prohibits the disclosure of contractor proposals, except when incorporated into the contract between the agency and the Exemption 4: The withheld information is a trade secret or confidential commercial or financial information that is being withheld for the reason(s) indicated. The information is considered to be proprietary because it concerns a licensee's or applicant's physical protection or material control and

accounting program for special nuclear material pursuant to 10 CFR 2.390(d)(1). The information is considered to be another type of confidential business (proprietary) information. The information was submitted by a foreign source and received in confidence pursuant to 10 CFR 2.390(d)(2). Exemption 5: The withheld information consists of interagency or intraagency records that are normally privileged in civil li tigation. Deliberative process privilege. Attorney work product privilege. Attorney-client privilege. Exemption 6: The withheld information from a personnel, medical, or similar file, is exempted from public disclosure because its disclosure would result

in a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. Exemption 7: The withheld information consists of records compiled for law enforcement purposes and is being withheld for the reason(s) indicated. (A) Disclosure could reasonably be expected to interfere with an open enforcement proceeding. (C) Disclosure could reasonably be expected to constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. (D) The information consists of names and other information the disclosure of which could reasonably be expected to reveal identities of confidential

sources. (E) Disclosure would reveal techniques and procedures for law enforcement investigations or prosecutions, or guidelines that could reasonably be

expected to risk circumvention of the law. (F) Disclosure could reasonably be expected to endanger the life or physical safety of any individual. Other: PART II.B -- DENYING OFFICIALS In accordance with 10 CFR 9.25(g) and 9.25(h) of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission regulations, the official(s) listed

below have made the determination to withhold certain information responsive to your request. DENYING OFFICIAL TITLE/OFFICE RECORDS DENIED APPELLATE OFFICIALEDOSECY Other: 2018 000531 04/08/2019Stephanie Blaney Duplicates FOIA Officer Select Title/Office from drop-down list Select Title/Office from drop-down list

Select Title/Office from drop-down list 01: RI BLUE CASE FILE CHECKLIST , EFFECTIVE 09/06/2012 Case#: I *-d{) g]-(J o~ AGENT: _____ Initials: __ _ Date: ---l (b)(7)(C) I (b)(7)(C) IA: . . Initials: Date: __ _ AGENT RESPONSIBILITY: ~ENCASE: * [ J1C o~pleted Alleger Advisement on Identity Protection Form * [ ] NCIC Information

Case File Marked with Red Dot * [ ] Draft NOV that triggered the investigation

• [ ] Completed , Signed and Approved Investigative Plan /CLOSED CASE: * [ ~II/Case Notes (Envelope)
• [ ] BC Wipe Audio Interview Files * [ ] Delete Case Related Material from Computer Drive IA RESPONSIBILITY:

/ OPEN CASE: * [ vf ARB Meeting Sheets * [4ning1SR

• [ v{ Checklist CL 9SE D CASE: * "VJ Completed Case Chrons Printout * [~nal ISR covering complete case history * [ ~ginal ROI and Exhibits rBl Case Investigation Status Reports Case Number: L.~---~1~~-_J Facility:

j TETRA TECH EC , I NC. Mtl'1=h 7199 1-2012..002 NUMBER ~!HH~H**=r ~*1*1~¥Alffl@Q IU*IUMl@i;i ~(7)(C) -CLO .(b)(7)(C) I N/A CASE INVESTIGATION STATUS REPORTS ISR ENTRY ESTIMAT:1D 'STATUS KEY DATE COMPLETION DATE --------"---REPORT

• ENTRY APPROVED BY 7199 11/30/2012 11/30/2012 CLO On November 20 , (b)(7)(C) NO 2012 , 01 contacted T i m MURPHY, Attorney for Tetra Tech (TT) who stated that although TT conducted an internal investigation as to what happened , between Bert BOWERS, TT : Radiation Supervisory TT , on January 13 , 2011; no written report was produced.

MURPHY confirmed to 01 that TT completed an audit report. 01 requested a copy of the audit report. 01 received the TT audit report on November 27, 2012 , which was added as an exhibit to the Report of Investigation (ROI). Ca s e w a s closed (unsubstantiated) on November 30 , -I 2012. 7198 10/31/2012 11/15/2012 RIO A Report of (b)(7)(C) NO Investigation (ROI) draft has been completed and submitted to the FOO for review. Status~ RID ECO: 11/2012. -1 7197 09/30/2012 11/15/2012 RID 01 plans to finish a NO review of testimony I and other records review in October 2012 and finalize a Report of Investigation (ROI) from the previous Case Agent. Status: RID ECO: 11/2012. I 7196 08/31/2012 11/15/2012 RID Due to the need to NO complete the review ' of testimony and other case related records, and completion of the report of

• investigation the ECO. is being extended to November 2012. Status: RIO ECO: 11/2012. ' 7195 07/31/2012 08/15/2012 RID During this NO reporting period, an incomplete draft Report of Investigation (ROI) was submitted by *---* 01: DI A , (b)(7)(C) I SA l (b)(7)(C) I resigned from the NRC to take a position with another federal agancy. The investigation was transferred to 01:RI SSA!(b)(7)(C)

!who will ' begin reviewing the transcripts, and other case related ' information so that ( I he will be able to complete the report of investigation. Upon completing the rAnort, SSA (b)(7)(C) ill submit me report to the SAIC for review and approval. Status: : RID ECO: 08/2012 ' During 'the latter (b)(7)(C) 7194 06/30/2012 08/15/2012 FWP NO half of this reporting period, r eporting agent received I transcript of the interviAw . d .. ,Ith l (b)(7)(C) I (b)(7)(C) r-transcript, along with a few additional transcripts are currently under review In preparation of drafting the report of Investigation in this matter. Based upon investigative priorities w i th respect of 01 Case Number 1-2012-001, and the closure process associated therein, the nine month metric wlll ' not be satisfied in this investigation. The ECO is being extended to July to allow for completion of the report of Investigation. Status: FWP ECD: 07/2012. 7193 05/31/2012 06115/2012 FWP During this NO reporting period, Tetra Tech EC. Inc. (b)(7)(C) I (b)(7)(C) l was interviewed at his office I (b)(7}(C l r 1 7192 04/30/2012 ' 7191 03/31/2012 I ( 05/15/2012 05/15/2012 FWP ' I I I I FWP VA. The Interview recording in this matter has been expedited and it is ant i cipated that a draft Report of Investigation (ROI) will be written in the immediate furture and that this investigation will be closed during the month of June. Status: FWP ECO: 06/2012. During this (b)(7)(C) NO reporting period, report i ng agent was schedule" tn intl!rviAw l (bl(7)(C) I (b)(7)(C) I on April 18, 2012, in Atlanta , GA 1 however, l (b)(7)(C) I invoked ' his right to counsel right before the interview, at which time, the reporting agent talked with Tim MURPHY , Esq. MURPHY highlighted some potential dates for which he and l (b)(7)(C) jwere ava i lable , and at this Juncture, efforts are being made to I facilitate the interview of ' (b)(7)(C) I which I is essential to this investigation. This investigation continues pending 1 the interview of l (b)(7)(C) !and any follow-up I investigative I activities required.

• Status: FWP ECD: I 05/2012. I During this NO j reporting period, (b)(7)(C) reporting agent reviewed transcripts from recently conducted interviews as well as continued to coordinate with Tetra Techj (b)(7)(C) (b)(7)(C)

I regarding potential interview dates and times. Reporting agent also had to discuss the potential interview schedule with Tim MURPHY , Esq., Corporate counsel to Tetra Tech EC , Inc. This investigation continues pending the completion of the final interview in this matter with (b)(7)(C) l and subsequent Investigative evaluation. Status: FWP ECD: 05/2012 71 9 0 02/29/2012 03/15/2012 FWP From February 6-10, NO 2012, reporting agent conducted 9 interviews [all. represented by counsel] with members of the management and leadership team at Tetra Tech EC, Inc. Testimony provided by management personnel was fairly cons i stent, wherein it was confirmed that BOWERS was furloughed In the summer of 2011 after being transferred from Hunters Point Naval ! Shipyard to* Alameda. BOWERS 1' was offered subsequent work as 1 recently as the fall of 2011, however, those jobs were In Saudi Arabia and Oak Ridge, TN. BOWERS declined both offers citing a desire to remain in the San Francis c o Bay Area. This Investigat i on continues pending supplemental management ' interviews to be conducted. More specifically, OJ will .. . TAtra T~~ll .. -(b)(7)(D) I (b)(7)(C) I who is I rocatea m me I areater l (b)(7)(D) l (b)(7)(D) rea. ::>>catus: t-"WP ECO: 03/2012. i------7189 01/31/2012 03/15/2012 FWP During this (b)(7)(C) NO reporting period, reporting agent received supplemental electronic mail correspondence from alleger Bert BOWERS in regards to updated information received. More specifically, BOWERS advised that he was contacted by Tetra Tech regarding his I nterest in another position with the company. This was on the heels of a tentative order being issued against Tetra Tech ! and in BOWERS favor, by the State I of California, I Department of Labor. Reporting agent intends to travel to California In February to conduct subsequent Interviews with management personnel In this matter. This investigation continues pending further investigative activity/field work. Status: FWP ECD: 03/2012 . (b)(7)(C) 7188 12/31/2011 01/15/2012 FWP During this NO reporting period , reporting agent has received supplemen t al email documentation from Bert BOWERS I regarding his discrimination claim against his former employer: Tetra Tech. While there have been few developments with respect to BOWERS,he I (BOWERS) has provided the reporting agent with information regarding two former Tetra Tech I employees from Hunters Po i nt Naval i Shipyard, who have I I filed discrimination ,1 claims with the I NRC. Susan I I ANDREWS and l (b)(7)(C) lw ere both interviewed by the reporting agent in November 2011, I In San Francisco and l~b)~7HC) l respect i vely, as they were witnesses I I I 7187 11/30/2011 ' I ' I ( ( 01/15/2012 FWP I i I ' I I for BOWERS. This investigati o n c ontinues pending additional inves t igative field work. Status FWP ' ' ECO: 0 11/2012. During this (b)(7)(C) NO reoortlna oeriod , (b)(7)(C) at Hunters t"O l nt r aval Shipyard, a cu r rent Tetra Tech EC , Inc. I employe e was .... _ ...

• in l(b)(?)(C) l (b)(7)(C)

I offered info ............. in support of the job that BOWERS was doing as the Radiation Safety Offi c er (RSO), but ...i;,. :1dvb1e that he (b)(7)(C) as not employed there during the tim e that BOWERS was having signi f icant bouts with management. On . Wednesday November 16, 2011 , 01 was contacted by Kathy DALEY , Deputy Labor co*mmissloner with the State of California , Department of Labor. DALEY further advised that her offi c e was preparing to issue a finding against ' Tetra T ech EC, Inc. l for the wrongful termina t ion of BOWERS. This investigation continues further investigative efforts. Status: FWP I ! ECO: 01/2012. I j 7186 10/31/2011 01/15/2012 FWP During this (b)(7)(C) NO report i ng period , reporting agent I traveled to San Francisco, CA to conduct initial interviews in this Investigation with alleger Elbert "Bert" BOWERS,and additional witnesses. BOWERS I previously provided the report.Ing agent with the names of former and current employees working at the Hunters Point Nava l Shipyard (HPNS). The employees i dentified by BOWERS and subsequently interviewed by the reporting agent were individual s who worked for I Tetra Tech EC, Inc (TTI), or one of the subcontractors to I TTI at HPNS. Six I I individuals I (includin9, the alleger) were interviewed during the tim e per i ods covering 10/25/11-10/27/11. This investigation continues pending further investigative efforts. Status: FWP ECO: 01/2012 I 7185 10/07/2011 01/15/2012 FWP On January 31 and February 1, 2011, ee*rt BOWERS , former T etra Tech RSO representative I at the Hunter's Po i nt Naval Shipyard decommissioning project provided a number of technical concerns and a discrimination

• complaint in electronic mail messages to Rick MUNOZ, NRC: RIV. Because Tetra Tech is a Region I (RI) licensee , these concerns were forwarded to the RI Office Allegations Office for disposition. Specifically , BOWERS a ll eged that he experienced a hostile work environment and discrimination after raising radiological concerns to include the need for improved and timely , communications related to radiologica l controls In the field at Hunters Point. BOWERS claims to have been repeatedly berated r Tech raising his concerns.

BOW~--.... clalmed that the (b)(7)(C) told him that his , safety concerns

• seemed to be based on the fact that his [BOWERS] name ; was listed on the 1 NRC license and that he!(b)(7)1C)

I ' could arrange to have it removed. BOWERS claims that when he informed thellfil] of his obligation to resolve issues at the site or begin steps to inform the ' NRC, the!(b)(7)(C) I ordered him to pack up his office and to get off of the site immediately. On April 1, 2011, was the last day that BOWERS performed work for Tetra Tech, but he was paid for accumulated overtime, sick and annual leave until August 1, 2011. These concerns were discussed during a March 16 , 2011, NRC:RI Allegation Review Board (ARB). The ARB, to include Regional Counsel determined that BOWERS had articulated a prima facie case of discrimination and that BOWERS would be offered access to the NRC's Alternate Dispute Resolution (ADR) program or to have 01 investigate. BOWERS chose to pursue the ADR option. BOWERS and Tetra Tech mediated on August 17, 2001, but did not ' reach a settlement and the issue was returned to RI for investigation. On October 5, 2011, Region I Field Office --- r

• I ( ( l (b)(7)(C) spokewnn I BOWERS who confinned that ADR mediat i on had failed and that he desired that 01 investigate his discrimination concern. Potential Violations Include 10 CFR 30.7 (Employee protection) and 10 CFR 30.10 (Deliberate misconduct). The Statute of LimitaUons tolls on April 1, 2016 . Status: FWP ECO (90 days): 01/2012.

Facility: Case Number: OFFICIAG *-;E ONLY

• 01 INVESTIGATION INFOR{ TION INVESTIGATION STATUS RECORD TETRA TECH EC, IN C. 1-2012-002 Case Agen t Date Opened: l (b)(7)(C) 10/0 7/201 1 03038199 Docket Number(s): ECD: Priority: High Case Code: Status: Case is closed Primary Alleg Source: Mater ials/Ind ustrlal (A} Alleger Rl-2011-A-0019 Allegation Number(s): Subject/Allegation

DISCRIMINAT ION AGAINST A FORMER RAD I ATION SAFETY OFFICER F O R HAVING RAISED A SAFETY CONCERN Monthl y Status Re port: 10/0712011 On January 31 and February 1, 2011 , Bert BOWERS , former Tetra Tech RSO representative at the Hunter's Point Naval Shipyard decommissioning p roject provided a number of technical concerns and a discrimination complaint in electronic mail messages to Rick MUNOZ , NRC:RIV. Because Te tra Tech is a Region I (R I) licensee , these concerns were forwarded to the R I Office Allegations Office for disposition. Specifically , BOWERS alleged that he experienced a hostile work environment and discr i mination after raising rad i ological concerns to inc lude the need for improved and timely communications related to radi ological controls i n the field at Hunters Point. BOWERS claims to have been repeatedly berated by a Tetra Tech (b)(7)(CJ (the last ins tance occurring in th~nce of the Tetra Tee (b)(7)(C) 1 his concerns.

BOWERS claimed that th [/'l old him that his safety concerns seeme based on the fact that his [BOWERS) na s listed on the NRC lic m nd that h~(b)(7)(C) I cou l d arrange to have It removed. BOWERS claims that when~ormed th ic;1 f his obligat i on to resolve issues at the site or begin steps to inform the NRC , th i c rdered hi ack up his office and to get off of the site immediately. On April 1 , 2011 , was the las ay that BOWERS performed work for T etra Tech , but he was paid for accumulated overtime, sick and annual leave until August 1 , 20 1 1. These concerns were discusse d during a March 16, 2011 , NRC: RI Allegation Review Board (ARB). The ARB , to include Regional Counsel determined that BOWERS had articulated a prime facie case of discrimination and that BOWERS would be offered access to the NRC's Alternate Dispute Resolution (ADR) program or to have 01 i nvestigate. BOWERS chose to pursue the ADR option. BOWERS and Tetra Tech mediated on August 17, 2001 , but did not reach a settlement and the issue was returned to RI for investigation. On October 5 , 2011, Region I Field Office!(b)(?)(C) ~poke with BOWERS who confirmed that ADR mediation had failed and that he desired t hat 01 investigate his discrimination concern. Potential Violations include 10 CFR 30. 7 (Employee protection) and 10 CFR 30.10 (Deliberate misconduct). The Statute of Limitations tolls on April 1, 2016. Status: FWP ECO (90 days): Q1/201 2. 10131/2011 During this reporting pe riod, report i ng agent traveled to San Francisco, CA to conduct Initial Interviews in this investigation with alleger Elbert "Bert" BOWERS , and additional witnesses. BOWERS previously provided the reporting agent with the names of former and current employees working at the Hunters Point Naval Shipyard (HP N S). The employees identified by BOWERS and subsequently Interviewed by the reporting age nt were individuals who worked for Tetra Tech EC, Inc (TII), or one of the subcontractors to TII at HPNS. Six individuals (Inclu ding the atleger) were interviewed during the time periods covering 1 0/25/11-10127 /11. This investigati on continues pending further i nvestigat ive efforts. Status: FWP ECO: 01/2.012 11/3012011 During this reporting period, (b)(7)(C) Shipyard, a current Tetra Te ... ch:--: e-=c-, :-ln-c.-em-p-:-lo_y_e_e_w_a_s-:-in-:-te-rv""'i ,...e-wed..,..,..in~b"""'=" 7'"'" C~:.;.,*.l (b)(7)(C) b ffered i nformation in f the Job that BOWERS was doing as the Rad i ation Safety Officer (RSO), but did advise that he (b)(7)(C) was not employed there during the time that BOWERS was having significant bouts with management. On Wednesday No vember 16 , 201 1, 01 was contacted by Kathy DALEY, De p uty Labor Commissioner wi1h the State of California, Department o f Labor. DALEY further advised that her office was preparing to I ssue a fi nding against Tetra Tech EC , In c. for the wrongful termination ot BOWERS. This investigation continues further investigative efforts. Status: FWP ECO: 0112012. 06/18/2013 9: 18: 47 A M OFFICIAL USE ONLY -01 IN'JESTIGATION INFORMATION Pa ge 1 Facility: Cas e Numb er: 12131/2011 01/31/2012 OFFICIA~ "E ONLY -Cl INVESTIGATION INFO~,.. TION INVESTIGATION STATUS RECORD TETRA TECH EC , INC. Case Agent ._!(b_)(_7).;..(C.:..) _____ _. 1-2 012-00 2 Date Opened; 10/07/2011 Du r ing this reporting period, reporting agent has received supplemental email documentation from Bert BOVVERS regarding his discrimination claim against h i s former employer: Tetra Tech. While there have been few developments with respect to BOWERS, he (BOWERS) has provided the reporting agent with i nform~tion regarding two former Tetra Tech employees from Hunters Point Naval Shipyard , who have filed discrimination claims with the NRC. Susan ANDREWS b 7 C ere both interviewed by the reporting agent in Novembe r 2011 , In San Francisco and (b)(7)(C) respectively , as they were witnesses for BOWERS. This investigation continues pending additional invest i gative field wo r k. Status FWP ECD: 01/2012. During th i s reporting period , report i ng agent received supplemental e l ectronic mall correspondence from allege r Bert BOWERS in regards to updated informat i on received. More specifically , BOWERS advised that he was contacted by Tetra Tech regarding his interest in another posit i on with the company. This was on the heels of a tentat i ve order being issued against Tetra Tech and in BOVVERS favor, by the State of California , Department of labor. Reporting agent intends to travel to California in February to conduct subsequent i nterviews w i th management personnel in this matter. Th i s investigat i on cont i nues pending furthe r investigative ac ti vity/field work. Status: FWP ECO: 03/2012 02129/2012 From February 6-10 , 2012, report i ng agent conducted 9 i nterviews [all represented by counsel] with members of the management and leadership team at Tetra Tech EC , Inc. Testimony provided by management personnel was fairly consistent, whe r ein it was confirmed that BOWERS was furloughed in the summer of 2011 after being transferred from Hunters Point Naval Sh i pyard to Alameda. BOWERS was offered subsequent work as recently as the fall of 2011, however , those jobs were i n Saud i Arabia and Oak Ridge, TN. BOWERS declined both offers ci ting a desire to remain in t he San Francisco Bay Area. This investiga ti on continues pending su lemental mana ement interviews to be conducted. More specifically, 01 will interview Tetra Tech 03/31/2 01 2 (b)(7)(C) who is located in the greate 1 (b)(7)(C) !area. Status: FWP E During this reporting period , report i ng agent reviewed transcri ts from recently conducted interviews as well as continued to coordinate with Tetra Tech (b)(7)(C) regard l ng potentia l i nterview dates and times. Report i ng agent also had to discuss t e po en 1a tn erv1ew schedu l e with Tim MURPHY , Esq., Corporate counsel to Tetra Tech EC , Inc. This investigation continues pending the completion of the final interview in th i s matter with!(b)(7)(C) I and s ubsequent investigative eva l uation. Status: FWP ECO: 05/2012 04/30/2012 During this reporting period , re ortin a ent w;:is scheduled to Interview (b)(l)(C) on~ r, xixCJ jl~r bxixc) l however , (b)(7)(C) invoked his right to counsel ng e ore t e interview, at which time, the reportin a ent talked wit in'I MURPHY, Esq. MURPHY highlighted some potential dates for which he and (b)(7)(C) were available, and at this juncture , efforts are being made to facilitate the interview o b 7 c which is essential to this investigat i on. This investigation continues pending the interview o (b)(7)(C) and any follow-up investigative activities required. Status: FWP ECO: 05/2012. 05131/2.012 During this reporting period , Tetra Tech EC, Inc. !(b)(?)(C) !was interv i ewed at his office inJ(b)(7)(C) lThe interview recording in this matter has been expedited and it is a nticipated that a draftepon of lnV stigatlon (ROI) will be written in the immediate furture and that this , i nvestigation will be c losed during the month of June. Status: FWP ECD: 06/2012. 06130/201 2 During the latter half of this re o rtin eriod , reporting agent received transcript of the interview conducted w i th (b)(7)(C) transcript , alo*ng With a few additional transcripts are currently under review n prepara 10n o ra ing the report of Investigation in this matter. Based upon investigative priorities with respect of 01 Case Number 1-2012-001 , and the closure process associated therein , the nine month metri c w i ll not be satisfied in th i s investigation. The ECO I s being extended to J u ly to allow for comple1ion of the report of investigation. Status: FWP ECO: 07/2012. 06/18/20 1 3 9:18:4 7 A M OFFICIAL USE ONLY 01 INVESTIGATION INFORMATION P ag e 2 Facility: Case Number. 07/31/2012 OFFI C IA~" -: e ON L Y* 0 1 INV l: STIGATION INFO R( TION INVE STIG ATION S T A TUS RE COR D TETRA TECH EC , I NC. Case Agent: l (b)(7)(C) 1-2012-002 Date Opened: 10/07/2011 During this re 7 orti ng p er i od, an I ncomplete draft Repo rt of Investigation (RO I) was submitted by former 01.R I SA Ub}(_}(C} !from to take a position with another federal agancy. The i nvestigation was transferred to 0 1: RI SSA (b)(7)(C) ho will begin rev i ew i ng the transcripts , and other case related i n~

• so that he will be able to complete the report of investigation. Upon completing the report, SSA (b)(7)(C) will submit the re p ort to t he SA I C for review and approval. Status: R I D ECO: 08/2012 08/31/2012 Due to the need to complete the rev i ew of testimony and other case related records, and completion of the report of I n vestigation the ECO Is being extended to N ovember 20 1 2. Sta t us: R I D ECD: 11/2012. 09/30/2012 0 1 plans to fin ish a review of testimony and other records re vi ew i n October 2012 and finalize a Report of I n vest i gat i on (ROI) from the prev i ous Case Agent. Status: RIO ECO: 1112012. 10/31/2012 A Repo rt of Investigation (RO I) draft h as been comple t ed and submitted to the )~fl or review. S t atus: R I D E CO: 11/2012. 11/30/2012 On November 20, 2012 , 01 contacted Tim MURP H Y , Attorney for Tetra Tech (TT) who stated that although TT con d ucted an internal investiiiation as to what ha pp ened between Bert BOWERS , TI Radiat io n Supervisory Personnel and!(b)(7_Cl l TT , on January 13 , 20 11; no w r i tten report was produced. MURPHY confi r med to 0 1 that TT completed an audit report. 01 requested a copy of the audit report. 01 received the TT audit report on November 27, 2012 , which was added as an exhibit to the Report of Investigation (ROI). Case was closed (unsubstantiated) on November 30, 2012. Com pletion Date: Issue Date: DOJ Act lon(s): 01 V iol ation (s): 06/18/20 13 9: 18: 4 7 AM 11/30/2012 Tot al Staff Hours: 43 3.0 Months Open: 14.0 DOJ Referral Date: Statue of Limitations Date: 04/01/2016 O F FICIA L USE ON LY
• 01 IN\'ES T IGA T ION INFORMA T ION Page 3 Facility: Case Numbe r. OFFICIAL ( ~~ONLY* 01 INVESTIGATION INFORq' "'ION CASE CHRONOLOGY TETRA TECH EC , INC. 1-2012-002 Case Agent Date Opened: !(b)(7)(C) 10/07/2011 Date Activity 10/10/2011 Reporting agent attempted to contact allege r Bert BOWERS via both email and t elephone.

leaving messages through both mechanisms. Contact was initiated by the reporting agent in an effort to schedule the alleger interview in this matter. 10/14/2011 On Wednesday October 12, 2011, reporting agent received a return call and email from alleger Bert BOWERS , who confirmed to meeting with the reporting agent for the purpose of initial interview o n Wednesday October 26, 2011, in Redwood City, CA. 10/3112011 Between the time periods cove ri ng 10/25/11 and 10/27/11, reporting agent interviewed alleger Elbert "Bert" BOWERS, along with five other individuals who are currently or were previously employed at Hunters Point Naval Shipyard , by either Tetra Tech EC, Inc. (TT) or a subcontractor ton. 11107/2011 On Tuesday November 1, 2011, reportln a ent interviewed former Tectra iech !(b)(l)(C) !(b)(7):c) [Hunters Point Naval Shipyard) (b)(7)(C) in !(b)(7)(C) I L--------' 11121/2011 On Wednesday evening November 16, 2011, reporting agent received a voice mail message from State of California, Deputy Labor Commiss ione r Kathy DALEY. DALEY advised that her office was investigating the matter of wrongful termination filed by Elbert " Bert" BOWERS, former Radiation Safety Officer at Tetra Tech EC , INC. DALEY f urther advised of some safety concerns which she had and some critical information~he des i red to share with the NRC. Reporting agent forwarded the voicemail message to the R b ) who , In turn, sent it to the appropriate technical staff personnel and Office of Regional Counsel, rther review. This investigation continues. 12/19/2011 ~evi ewed chrons. (b)(7) 0211712012 (C) eviewed case chrons -SA needs t o update chrons 02/28/2012 03/30/2012 03/30/2012 04/09/2012 From February 6-10, 2012, reporting agent conducted 9 interviews with members of the management and leadership team at Tetra Tech EC, Inc. The Interviews were held In conjunction with parallel

• interviews also performed by the State of California, Dep art ment of Labor , at their facility ln downtown San Francisco, CA. Interviews were conducted separately, which accounts for such the extended period of time utlllzed for the interviews, and were in the presence of Tetra Tech lega l counsel T im MURPHY, E sq. from the Law fi rm of FISHER, PHILLIPS, LLP. Testimony prov i ded by management personnel was fairly consisten t , wherein it was confirmed that BOWERS was furloughed in the summer of 201 1 after being tra ns ferred from Hunters Point Naval Shipyard to Alameda. BOWERS was offered subsequent work as recently as the fall of 2011, however, those jobs were in Saudi Arab i a and Oak Ridge , TN. BOWERS declined both offers citing a desire to remain in the San Fran cisco Bay A rea. This i nvestigation continues pending supplemental management Interviews. (b)(7) SA needs to update ch rons. (C) eview Reporting agent rea ched contacted Tetra Te c h!(b)(l)(C) !who agreed to be interviewed

.!(b)(7)(CI !did advise of his desire to have counsel and indicated that his attorney wou ld call the reporting agent with perspective interview dates. Th i s investigation continues pending further inves tigativ e efforts. Reporting agent has contact Tetra Tec~(b)(l)(C) !approximately three t i mes since March 30, 2012, however messages were left twice with no subsequent return received by 0 1 to date. Reporting agent intends to f ootijlct prevjously Interviewed Individ ual s within the Tetra Tech Management Chal_n, In an effort to locate ~b)(7)1 , C) !of Nuclear Services. This investigation co ntinue s. 04/30/2012 1~~?) ~evlewed. 06/18/20 1 310: 32: 47 AM OFFICIAL USE ONLY 01 INVESTIG.ATION INFORMAIION Page 1 Facility: Case Number: OFFICIAL ( " C ONLY

• 01 INVESTIGATION INFOR~1 TIOt-.L . TETRA TECH EC , INC. 1-2012-002 CASE CHRONOLOGY 051301201~eviewed 06/29/2012 Interview tra ns cript of l (b)(7}(C) l was recently received and will be reviewed on today. Based upon Investigative case priorities (particularly, the clos i ng ROI and process ass ociated with case No. 1-2012-001), reporting agent did not satisfy the nine month metric regar ding this case. Reporting agent is also awaiting additional documentation from the legal representatives for Tetra Tech , as supplemental dooomentation has been requested. A draft ROI will be prepared upon complete re view of all subsequent transcripts and doc u mentation. 06/'2912012 l l~~(C ~eviewed 08/01/2012 Closing ROI has been submitted t o SSA l (b)(l)(C)

!tor editorial review and amendements where neoessary. 09/11/2012 10/18/201 2 /~?) eviewed case chrons and did case review with SA. Rewritten/revised RO i is about to be submitted AIC for review. 11120/2012 TC: nm MURPHY, Attorney for Tetra Tech (D), stated that although (TI) conducted an internal investigation as to whether or not Bert BOWERS resigned; no written report was produced. MURPHY added that an audit was conducted which resulted i n a written report. 01 requested the aud it written rep o rt. 11126/2012 TC: T im MURPHY , 01 again requested that he provide ITs audit report to 01. 11/27/2012 MURPHY pro vided a copy of the TT audit report to 01. Case Agent added the aud i t report to the ROI and submitted same for closure. 06/18/201310:32

47 AM OFFICIAL use ONLY -Cl INVESTIGATION INFORMATION P,age2 Facility: Case Numbe r: -OFFICIAL,' . '"'E ONLY 01 IN\'ESTIGATION INFORr* TION-GINNA 1-2012-001 CASE CHRONOLOGY Case Agent: Date Opened: l (b)(7)(C) 10/07/2011 Date 11/07/2011

~~tl;~~sday November 3, 2011 , reporting agent interviewed alleger!(b)(?)(C) !at his residence in !(b)<z)(C} I provided a detailed account as to the allegations which were provided to the-NRC previously. According to (b}(7)(C) had a history of being inatten ti ve (sleeping} while on post on night shift at GINNA. On Frida ov r 4 2011 re orting agent interviewed former Wackenhut b 71 c

• b 7 C b 7 c reviously worked at the GINNA Nuclear Stati f re (b)(?)(C) corrobo r ated the statements provided by (b)(7)1 C) in that , (b)(?)(C) had a history of sleeping while on post at GINNA. 12/1912011

)~f) reviewed chrons. 02/17/2012 )~J' ) rev i ewed case chrons -SA needs to update chrons 02/28/2012 On or about February 22, 2012, reporting agent contacted G4S Security Management personnel at G IN NA in an effort to identify availability for Interviews with Management personnel. Reporting.agent is currently negotiating potential meeting dates at this time with management , although there could be some altertatlons to the schedule based upon the intervention of corporate counsel. This investigation cont i nues. 03/3012012 SA needs to update case chron~review. 03130/201 2 On March 27 and 28, 2012, reporting agent conducted In t erviews with security management personnel from G4S, at the N.E. GINNA Nuclear Power Plant in Ontario, NY. Interviews were conducted with G4S l(b)(7)(C) !G4S l/b)~\/C\ l and l (b)(?)(C) !(b)(7)(C) li ormer G4S!_ b)(7)(C) . as a(so interviewed regarding er knowledge of the alleged Inattentiveness In this matter. This Investigation 04/3arlOIZ [~::::n::.: I:::~:::::::::::** efforts 05/30/2012 I m t eviewed -Case agent needs to update chrons 06/06/201 2 Required field work has been completed in this matter and draft ROI i s currently being prepared by the reporting agent at this tim e. 06/29/2012 Closing ROI has appropriately edited and reviewed by 01: RI Management , and this investigation is scheduled to be closed i n the immediate future. 06129/2012 case closed ~reviewed 06/18/20 13 1 0:32: 22 A M OFFICIAL USE ONLY 01 IN\'ESTIGATION INFORMATION P a ge 1 (b)(7)(C} From: Sent: To: Cc: pate .sewa 1. dol.gov

Subject:

Re: (no subject) l (b)(?)(C) Regard i ng the referenced phone conversation Just completed , this response confirms my request tha t 01 investigate the discrimination complaint of record. Information related to the corresponding USDOL Investigator involved with the complaint is as follows: Sewali K. Patel Reg i onal Investigator U.S. Department of Labor/OSHA 90 7th Street , Suite 18100 San Francisco , CA 94103 Tel: (415) 625-2538 Fax; ( 415) 625-2534 E-mail: patel.sewal L k@dol.go v In paralle l , , should the need for additional Information or feedback becomes necessary , feel free to contact me using any of the options that follow. Your promptness as reflected i n your timely effort to contact m e i s appre c iated, In a message dated 10/5/20111

17: 14 P.M. Pa c ifi c DaylightTime

,_!'b-)(TJ_(_c_) _____ _,~rites: Mr. Bowers -During our telephone discussion a few minutes ago , you requested that 01 investigate your discrimination complaint. Please confirm that and also provide me the name of the USDOL I nvestigator in a return email. Thank you , l (b)(l)(CJ USNRC, Office of Investigations Region I 475 Allendale Rd. King of Prussia , PA 19406 [O]!(b)(7)(C) 1 (b)(7)(C) From: Sent: To: Cc:

Subject:

Ghasemian, Shahram Tuesday, October 04, 2011 9:33 AM R1ALLEGATION RESO ,...U_R_C __ E __ ...., Ghasemian , Shahram; (b)(7)(C) Traci L. Morse Rl-2011-A-0019 (adr-1 -era ech In this case, the parties mediated on 8/17/2011 but did not reach a settlement. However, it seems that they wanted to continue negotiations because they asked whether we (the NRC) would pay for another round of mediations. I declined that request ma i nly because of the cost but gave the parties several weeks to work on their own to see if they can reach a settlement. We gave them until the end of September. Since no settlement was reached and there was no status from the parties , Cornell will be notifying the parties that we are closing the ADR case file and returning it to the region for investigation. So, given this background , it may be worthwhHe for 0 1 to contact the alleger first before we open a case to see what the alleger wants. For all I know , they may still be working on settling it on their own. Thanks Shahram Shahram Ghasemian Nuclear Reg1:,1latory Commission 301.415.3591 10/s/11 I) 0t. ufhJ,:r (b)(7)(C) . (b)(7)(C) 0tJ~c..f it T\\ uJJti.Sn ('1'°)1'Yf Ad (b)(7)(C) 1 I I ,*' ,* I ' s t£J'ltl.R. Johnson, Sharon From: Sent: To: Cc:

Subject:

Ghasemian , Shahram Wednesday , June 01 1 20 11 6: 11 PM Wilson , Ernest; Urban , Richard Johnson , Sharon; McFadden , Jo h n R e: Rf-2011-A-00 1 9 (T e t r a-Tec h Cl) Ernie -thanks for th e follow uo a n d update. If he wants cornell , is he going t o call c ornell o r s hould co rnell call h i m? I f he is waiting for a call, oould you email me his contact n u mbe r. Thanks Shahram Ghasem i an Nuc l ear Re ufatory Commiss i on (b)(7)(C) c 3 0 1.415.3 5 91 w From: Wilson , Ernest To: Urban, Richard

• Cc: Johnson, Sharon; McFadden, John; Ghasemian , Shahram Sent: Wed Jun 0117:56:42 2011

Subject:

RI-2011-A-0019 (Tetra-Tech CI) Rick , As you requested , I spoke with the subject from 5: 15 to 5: 40 PM on Wed , June 1 , 2011. He had j ust come from a meeting at a restaurant with "2 upper level management ", i.e. an HR Rep. and a safety expert. He said something about it was a first meeting from the Tetra-Tech Employee Hotline complaint he m ade. He is trying to exhaus t all of his avenues before engaging NRC (01) (" that was the way he was taught and brought up in the indust_ry ," i.e., that you try to resolve issues internally. I got the impression that he thought he had to do all these things before engaging 01. I explained to him the process and that Cornell was an avenue for him to take although he was not obligated to go that route and we (01) could start an investigation now (I told him that leads tend to dry up the longer he waits to decide on 01). He thought he had to next go to Cornell to " stay in pr.ocess." I explained to him that his thought was wrong and that it was completely his option and right to choose 01 or to attempt to mediate thru Cornell. He authorized me to tell you that his next call on this matter is to Cornell to try the final mediation option. He said there is a possibility that Tetra-Tech will choose not to mediate with him. I explained to him the many scenarios we have had with the employees and employers in the early ADR process. I also further explained the difference between DOUOSHA (making a person whole) and the NRC/01 because he commented about being limited to 180 days. Ern 1 " .. J McFadden, .John From: Sent: To:

Subject:

*Attachments:

Jack: R4ALLEGATION Resource Wednesday, Fehr'ua,y-23, 2011 3:09 PM McFadden ,* John . **SENSITIVE ALLEGATION MATERIAL** 11021_aEPR.do .c; 11021 receipt form.pdf Just checking my voicemaiJ, he.re is the rece i pt form and ARB record !unsigned) for the case at Hunter's Point, concerning Tetra.Tech. Than~s, Judith ~;Co a-* /2-1 1 ~1~.s/cH?11 '5,'Jt?/ 1 Mailing Address:

• If marked no need Emall Address: (b)(7)(C) Page __ of __ licensee l~entffied*

X est of Alleger Information L._ ______ ...J--------Employer: Tetra Tech EC , Inc. Occupation

Health Physicist Twin Oaks I, Suite 309 5700 Lake Wright Drive Norfolk, VA 23502 Relationship to Facility: Licensee ~mpk>y.e~ (co~tra~tor)

.uncter the RASO approved decommiss i oning pla n and ~emedlatlon p ro j ect af Huntet's Point. San Francisco , Califomta. *

• For "Relationship

", select: Licensee Employee; Former Licensee Employee; Contractor Employee; Former Contractor Employee; Private Citizen; News Media; Special Interest Group; Other Federal Agency; .State Agency; Municipal Government

Fed/Stale/Local Govt Employee; 01 Confidential Source; IG Confidential Source; Other (describe).

.::.15.0NCERNEDJNDIVIDUAL CORRESPON:C)EN

OE MeT-1\fQ.O *ANO*TJMI: ..

• TIME
• 10:00 ! am f-AM or PM Telephone X \ W'if W>.:\.'.* .'.0*:. ..

Postal S~rvice Other/Specific Requests/Comments

LICENSEE INFORMATION REQUEST & *INDIVIDUAL

!DliNTITY PROTECTION Explain that if the concerns are discussed with or Information is requested*from the licensee, that alleger's identity will not be revea l ed. This contact i s necess~ry for the.NRC to conduct our independent evaluation for the concerns. If the concerns are an agreementstate issue or the Jurisdict i on of another agency , explai n that we will transfer the ___ _cancem to the appm.prlataag.ency, and If the allegec agrees , we will provide tbe..allege~iciei:itity..foi:.follow.up ~--. ----7 YES X

• No Oo-es tHe Cl OBJECT to the NRC requesting
• information from the licensee to . ., ---support our evaluation?
• /'_ YES _!_" No Does the individual OBJECT to the reJease of tneir identity?

Explain that in certain situati.ons (such as discrimination cases), their identity will need to be released in order. for the NRC to obtain specific and related informatior-i from the licensee. ALLEGATION

SUMMARY

ProVide a shott*sunimary or keywords/topics/subject (for large number of 90ncems) for the allegation's contents below. This summary is to provide an overview or qu i ck reference in allegab'on tracking reports: * . The Tetra Tech EC RSO ~presentative at the at-Hunter's Point decommissioning and remed i at i on project experienced a "hostile work enxirorJment" when raising safety concerns and addressing subsequent need f or Improved and timely communications related to radlolog i cal* controls in the field. The site RSO feels th ere Is a poor safety culture In terms of managem~nt communication and management .support associated with site RSO authority. The site RSO felt threatened when the !(b)(7)(C) !stated; *your safety concerns seem to be based on the fact .that y our name is on the license , I can arran g e to have it removed.* RSC.EIPT*'METHOD-HOW RECEIVED . Cell :ret~phonel _L_ Inspection __ In-Person __ Licensee Other Method/Comments

Letter Email Fax FACILITY Facility Name: Tetra Tech EC , Inc. Docket(s)/Ucense

1. 030-38199/29

.: 31396-01 Additional Contac t Information

LocatlorvAddress

Twin Oaks I, Suite 309 5700 Lake Wrigh t Drive Norfolk , VA. 23502 OSHA: 1-800-321-0SHA Regional Offices: htt o://www.osha.g o v/h tml/RA m a p.ht m l DOL Main Call Center Number: 1-866-4-USA-DOL

• Monday-Friday 8 am to 6 pm {h ttp://Www.d o l.gov) Discrimination/Wage

-Back Pay Issues: 1-866-487-9243 ' { ij~i~,s!.~a!e ._ 30 Di!l!~ zo Da~s 90 0;:iv s 120 , Da v s ~-"!~ffif. ' . . 3/4/2011 4/13/2011 5/3/2011 .:.: , *.. ,. k .**, .*.,\. 6/2/2011.' '. .. J :* :.

• Purpose of this ARB: lnitlatARB Basis for a Subseqµent AR6: Does the Cl **pBJECT to the NRC requesting information from the lic~nsee to support our evaluatipn?

If any of the following inhibiting factors apply, this allegation shall not be submitted to the licensee for investigation or review.

• X X X X X Information cannot be released i n sufficient detail to the licensee without compromising the identity of th e alleger or' confidential source. The llcensee could compromise an Investigation or lnspectio_n because of knowledge gained from.the discuss io ns. The allegation is made against the licensee's ma!lagement or those parties who would normally receive and address the alle ation. The basis of the allegation Is Information received from a Federal or State agency that does not approve of .the information being released. The licensee's allegation trend, quality.of response(s), problem i dentificat ion and resoiutior.r, and/or cycle review results are such t hat the NRC should indepe,ndentl evaluate the concem(s).

The NRC evaluation would be more timely and efficient -there is an ongoing or upcoming inspection which could evaluate the concern or a similar/same concern is already being evaluated by the NRC.

• Significant public/Commissi~n i nterest warrants independent assessment of concem(s). The alleger has taken the concem(s}

to the licensee with unsatisfactqry results. JWeaver LHanson JThompson ! Chairman Approval: II Date: i t * *RX Code or Functional Area: . ( Decommissioning Materials Health Ph sics Concern: <A concern is one or two sentences.) 0 1 Case No.: 4-20XX-OXX The Tetra Tech EC, RSO representative at the Hunter's Point decommissioning project, experienced a "hostile work environment" when raising safety concerns and addressing subsequent need for improved and timely communications related to radiological controls in the field. The site R_SO feels there is a poor radiologic safety culture in terms of management communication and management supp__ort associated w i th site RSO authority. The site RSO described the construction management 's progressively eroding recognition/backing of its NRC license and acknowledgement of the authority/l~vel of respect associated with t e RS and RSO r epresentatives -and authorized users. The site RSO felt threatened when the (bJ(?)(C) tated; *"y our safety concerns seem to be based on the fact that your name is on the license, I can arrange to have it removed." The site RSO has. since *been re-assigned to the Alameda decommissionin ro*ect. Concern Back g round. S u pporting Information. & Comments The Cl has submitted a total of sevente*en (17)-e-mails to RIV pertaining to his concerns and response initiated by site _and corporate management. The s_ite RSO has been removed fr.om the site a~d managem*ent has been g<::1ing through his files. l(ccoroir':i'9

• -t6 th~'C*l ,*'N'RC reqlilirred records., have* be-en compro~ised and are* being destroyed." .' Regulato ry Re q uirement *fil *
• e owt *c..*' .... * ,.....,.il!li:*~=-=i.-.;....=~~-

-"'....__..,;:;: . .,..;,J-" *~~~~:"$~~:.=t. ~ Potential! , 1 O CFR Part 20 and /or rocedural violations Describe the concern's safety significance . . Check each uestion as a licable to this concern. X Is it a.declaration, statement, or assertion of impropriety o r-Inadequacy? ls there a pot~ntial defic i ency? Is the im propriety or inadequacy associated with NRC regulated activities or policy (e.g. SCWE)? Is the validity of the i~sue unknown? *Technical Staff Recommendation(s) Date Recommended Action Assigned Branch Planned Date ARB Date ARB Decision s Assl ned to 02116111 ACES to contact Re*gion I Allegation concemirig jurisdiction and ACES ACES to send acknowled ement letter to alle er. Accepted. Planned Date UNITED STATES NUCLEAR R EG UL AT O R Y C O MM IS SI O N OFFICE OF INVESTIGATIONS FIELD OFFICE , REGION I 2 1 00 RENAISSA N CE BLVD. KING OF PRUSSIA , PA 19406-2745 (b)(7)(C) December 4 , 2012 MEMORANDUM TO: William M. Dean , Reg i onal Adm i nistrator Region I FROM: SUBJECT !(b)(?)(C) l Special Agent in Charge Office o f Investigations Field Office , Region I HUNTERS POINT NAVAL SHIPYARD: DISCRIM I NATION AGAINST A FORMER RADIATION SAFETY OFFICER FOR HAVING RAISED A SAFETY CONCERN (CASE NO. 1-2012-002/ALLEGAT I ON NO. Rl-201 1-A-0019) Enclosed , for whatever action you deem appropriate , is the Office of Investigations (01) Report of Investigation concerning the above matter. Please note that documents may have been gathered during the course of the investigation tha t are not included in either the report or the exhibits. This additional documentation would be maintained i n the 01 case file and available for the staff's review upon request. Neither this memorandum nor the report may be released outside the NRC without the permission of the Director, 01. Please ensure that any internal office distribution of this report is controlled and limited only to those with a need to know and that they are aware of the sensitivity of its contents. Treat as "Off i cia l Use Only -01 Investigation Information ." Enclosures

report w/exhibits c c w/en d: R. Zimm e rman , OE cc w/o encl: M. Spen c er , Acting OGC M. Satorius, FSME CASE NO. 1-2012-002 United States N u clear Reaulatory Commissio n Report of Investigation HU NTE RS POINT N AV A L SHIPYARD:

DISCRIMI N ATION AG A I N ST A FOR M ER RA DIATIO N SAFETY OFFICER FOR HAVI N G RI A SED A SAFETY CO N CER N Office of Investigations Reported by 01:RI I OFFICIAL u*se: ONLY 01 INVESTIGATION INFORMATION Title: HUNTERS POINT NAVAL SHIPYARD DISCRIMINATION AGAINST A FORMER RADIATION SAFETY OFFICER FOR HAVING RAISED A SAFETY CONCERN lice nsee: Tetra Tech EC, Inc. 1000 The American Road Morris Plains , NJ 07950 Docket No.: 03038199 Allegation No.: Rl-201 1-A-0019 Reported b y: (b)(7)(C) Senior Special Agent .....,.,....,.,....,..,ce.,,......,., o....,..,,,., nv...,..., e=s.,,.,_1gations Field Office, Region I Participating Personne l: r XlXCJ I v. former Special Agent Office of Investigations Field Office , Region I Case No.: 1-2012-0 02 Report Date: November 30, 2012 Control Office: 01: RI Status: CLOSED (b)(7)(CI '-------...,1 Special Agent i n Charge Office of l n V estigations Field Office, Region I WARNING 1"i""'-1-1..11SSEMINATE , PLACE IN THE PUBLIC DOCUME R DISCUSS TH S OF THIS REP . STIGA TION OUTSIDE NRC WITHOUT AUTHO PROVING OFFICIAL OF THIS REPQBI.-U ORIZED DISCLOSURE T IN ADVERSE ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION AND/OR CRIMINAL PROSECU . OFFICIAL USE ONLY 01 INVESTIGATION INFORMATION ( OFFICIAL USE ONLY -01 INVESTIGATION INFORMATION SYNOPSIS This investigation was initiated by the U.S. Nuclear Regu l atory Commission (NRC), Office of Investigations (01), Region I , on October 7, 2011 , to determine whether a former Radiation Safety Officer (RSO)/RSO representative (RSOR), Tetra Tech EC Inc. (TT), working at the Hunters Point Naval Shipyard (HPNSY), .decommissioning facility, was discriminated against for having raised safety concerns. Based upon the evidence developed during the investigation, 01: RI did not conclude that a former RSO/RSOR, TT, HPNSY, was discriminated against for having raised safety concerns. AGENT IN CHARGE, OFFICE OF INVE Case No. 1-2012-002 1 OFFICIAL USE ONLY m GI INVESTIGATION INFORMATION ( OFFICIAL USE ONLY QI INVESTIGATION IN FORM ATION THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY NOT F OUT APPROVAL OF CIAL AGENT IN CHARGE, OFFICE OF INVESTIGA Case No. 1-2012-002 2 OFFICIAL USE ONLY GI INVESTIGATION INFORMATION ( OFFICIAL USE ONLY -01 INVESTIGATION INFORMATION TABLE OF CONTENTS S Y NOPSIS .............................. ......................... ......................... ................................................. 1 TE S TIMONIAL EVIDENCE .................... ............................................. .......................... .............. 5 DO C UMENTARY E V IDENCE ............................. ............................................ ..................... ....... 7 DETAILS OF INVESTIGATION ............. .......................... ................ ........................ .................... 9 App l icable Regulations .................................. ....................................... ........................... 9 Purpose of Investigation ..................................................... ............................................. 9 Ba ck ground ....................... ................................................................... ........................... 9 A llegation: Discrim i nation Against a Fo r mer Radiation Safety Officer for Ha vi ng Raised a Safety Concern .............................. ................................. ............... 1 0 Agent's An a lys i s of the Evidence ............. .................................. ........................ ............ 17 Conclus i on ................. ............................................................... ............... ..................... 18 LIST OF E X HIBITS ................................................................. .......................... ........................ 19 ENT IN CHARGE , OFFICE OF INVES C ase No. 1-201 2-002 3 OFFICIAL USE ON LY -Of INVESTI G ATION INFORMATI O N OFFICIAL USE ONLY QI INVESTIGATION INFORMATION THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY Case No. 1-2012-002 4 OFFICIAL USE ONLY QI INVESTIGATION INFORMATION -OFFICIAL USE ONLY 01 INVESTIGATION INFORMATION TESTIMONIAL EVIDENCE Exhibits (b)(7)(C) .___ ________ ____. Tetra Tech EC, Inc. (TT) ................................ ...................... 12 ANDR EWS, Susan V., Se n ior Health Physicist , Acute World Solutions (AWS) ............... .......... 13 l (b)(7)(Cl I n ..................... ............. 14 .... l (b_)(?_J(c_) _____________________ __,I n ............. 1s BOWERS , Elbert G., Former RSO/RSOR , TI ............... ....................... .................... ................ 16 (b)(7)(C) (b)(7)(C) (b)(?)(C) (b)(7)(C) (b)(7)(C) (b)(7)(C) (b)(7)(C) !New World Technolog ies (NWT) .............. 17 I Hunters Pein t Naval Shipyard (HPNS Y), TT ........ 18 l e & T Labs (C TL ) ................ ........................ .......... .... 19 C TL ............... ................... n .... ....................................................... 20 ................... .......................... .......... 21 N I HPNSY , TI .. WT .......... .................... , ............... ......... 22 .................. ..................................... 23 ;=.:r;::;; )(7::=.)(C;::) =============:::;------JI TI************* ....................... .............. 24 l (b)(7)(C) I TT ............. .................................................. ,2 5 l ("'"" b)('""'l)(,,...C} ....--------------~-------,1 TI ................ ................ 26 I .n ............................ .................................. 21 :1 (b:)(7:)(C:):::::::::::::::::::::::~:::;-I TI____. .... , ...................... ............................ ............... 28 OUT APPROVAL OF NT IN CHARGE , OFFICE OF INVEST Case No. 1-2012-002 5 OF-F-ICl,A,L use ONLY -01 INVESTIGATION INFOR~.ATION ( OFFICIAL USE ONLY QI INVESTIGATION INFORMATION THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY Case No. 1-2012-002 6 OFF I C IAL USE O NLY GI INVESTIGATION INFORMATION ( OFFIC I AL USE ONLY -GI INVESTIGATION INFORMATION DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE "Statemen t of Events I n the Vic in it of Bert BOWERS' Office on Janua 13, 2011," dated .January 17, 2011 (Exhibit 3). (b)(7)(C) , HPNSY , wrote: " Bert [BOWERS] went int (b)(7)(C) o ice gave aver a resignation and said that he was going to call t he NRC" and h (b)(?)(C) also provided the chronology of events which occurred on January 13 , 2011 , between ert "Bert" BOWERS , RSO/RSOR , HPNSY , and other members of TT supervision/management: Memorandum from (b)(?)(C) TT, to (b)(7)(C) Assignment o Bert to a e ay , x 1 1

• This document cap tured some of the concerns which (b)(?)(C) had with BOWERS' Job performance and additional details regardjnq

~n argument between ERS, other TT employees and (b)(7)(CJ !(b)(7)(C) jrr , that occurred at The Hunters Point Naval Shipyard (HP~:o:i v~. -on_o_r a-.-o-u.,....t the morning of January 1 3, 2011; Memorandum to BOWERS , subj: " Temporary Assignmen t to Radiological EMAC Projects at Former NA S Alameda in Alameda , California," dated February 1 , 2011 (Exhibit 5). This document detailed the temporary reassignment of BOWERS to the Naval Air Station (NAS) Alameda; BOWERS' Performance Appraisal , dated December 4 , 2009 (Exhibit 6). This document detailed a review of BOWERS' performance during the 2008-2009 rating year. The associated appraisal ranges from a scale of 1-5 (1 being the best). BOWERS ostensibly received an average rating of 3 in most categorical performance areas: BOWERS' ~;tnatl.Ce..~PPra isa l , dated November 24 , 2010 (Exhibit 7). This evaluation was prov i ded b (b)(7)(C) for 2009-2010 rating year. BOWERS ostensibly average a rating of 3 in most catego r ca a n ce areas; "Memo to File ," subj: " Pertormance A raisal for Bert BOWERS for Year 2011," dated November 21 , 201 1 (Exhibit 8). (b)(7)(C) documented that BOWERS did not receive a performance appraisal for the 2010-2011 rating year , and had been non-responsive to attempts at communication by TT management. This memorandum also captures that BOWERS was offered an assignment as the RSO Representative on the Al Kharj Project in Saudi Arabia, however , BOWERS declined;

• E-mail messages to TT Staff Perso n nel from !(b)(l)(C)

!Advising of Co n c urrence to Backfill Trenches in Work Areas , Which Was Radiologically Cleared , dated January 6, 2011 (Exhibit 9). The e-mail messages encompassed within these documents identify that the trenches i n the associated work areas had been radiologically cleared by Rad iologi cal Affairs Support Organization (RASO), the regulating authority for the U.S. Navy; CHARGE , OFFICE OF INVESTI C ase No. 1-:2012-002 7 O FFI C IA L USE O~JlY 01 INVESTIGATIO~J INFORMATION OFFICIAL USE ONL'Y -01 INVESTIGA T ION INFORMA I ION (b)(?)(C) (b)(7)(C) E-mail messages between nd BOWERS , subj voice message to BOWERS , dated December 30 , 2011 , dated December 30 , 2011 , and Janu 012 (Exhibit 10). The e-mail messages encompassed within these documents captur (b)(?)(C) addressing the possibility of acquiring alternative work assignments for BOWE w1 subsidiary companies of TT. The e-mail cha i n also identifies BOWERS' lack of interest in any positions located outside of the San Franc i sco Bay area; E-mail from John H. SCOTT , Scott Law Firm, Legal Counsel for BOWERS , to Timothy MURPHY , Legal Counsel for TT , dated September 2 , 2011 (E x hibit 11). SCOTT wrote that BOWERS was employed and was only inte r ested in Job opportunities with TT with i n the San Francisco Bay area and specifically was not interested i n a position in Saudi Arab i a; NRG Safety Inspection Report and Compliance Inspection, dated Apri l 29 , 2011 (Exhibit 29). This inspection was conducte~(b)(7)(C) I Division of Nuclear Materials Safety (DNMS), at HPNSY , on March 29-31 , 2011. The inspect i on resulted in one , non-cited violation; specifically " During a training session , a very low activity radium button check sour c e was l eft unsecured in an unrestricted area during a lunch break for a training sess i on on March 18 , 2010 ... ."; and TT " Rad i ation Safety Annual Audit Report ," surveillance dates January 18-21 , 2011 (Exhibit 30). TT conducted an annual radiat i on safety audit at the HPNSY. On page 5 of 26 , severa l deficiencies w e re noted including: " Send in 4 th Quarter dosimetry .... >>; " Move exempt quantity radioa c tive sources from the RSOR office , and store i n source storage lo c ker .... "; and " Provide documentat i on to compliance with 10 CFR 20.1301 based on 2010 dosimetry results, and weekly RCA surveys." Also, on pages 15 and 16 , it was noted BOWERS did not want to r eturn to th e s i te (HPNSY) " because he feels intimidated. This feelin of intimidation stems from an argument involving the RSOR RS] and (b)(7 J(C) et al.], followed b y a subsequent argument with the (b)(?)(C J and (b)(7)(C) on January 13, 2 011 .... " Additionally , i t was no e

• at B was reass1gne o ano er TT work location (NAS Alameda) to allow time for the investigation into what happened between BOWERS and TT staff on January 13 , 2011 , and to avo i d " further escalation

." NOT FOR PUBLIC T IN CHARGE , OFFICE OF INVESTI Case No. 1-2012-002 8 O F FICIAL USE ONLY 01 INVESTIGATION INFORMATION OFFICIAL USE ONLY 01 INVESTIGATION INFORMATION DETAILS OF INVESTIGATION A pp licable Regulations 10 CFR 30.7: Employee protection (2011-2012 Editions) 10 CFR 30.10(a)(1): Deliberate misconduct (2011-2012 Er;:litions) Pur pos e of Investigation This investigation was initiated by the U.S. Nuclear Regu l atory Commission (NRC), Office of Investigations (01), Region I , on October 7 , 2011, to determine whether BOWERS working at the HPNSY decommissioning facility, was discriminated against for having raised safety concerns (Exhibit 1 ). Background On January 31 and February 1, 201 1, BOWERS provided a n umber o f technical concerns and a discrimination complaint in electronic mail messages to Rick MUNOZ, NRC: RIV. Because TI is a Region I (RI) licensee, these co n cerns were forwarded to the RI Allegations Office for disposltion. Specifically , BOWERS alleged that he experienced a hostile work environment and discr i mination after raising radiological concerns to include the need for improved and timely communications related to radiological con tro ls in the field at Hunters Point. BOWERS claimed to have been re eatedly berated by a TT 1.1.(b .. (7~(,.;.: C)-:---:------~---===-r.~~-------. (b)(7)(C) (t he last instance occurring in the presence of the TT (b)(7)(C) (b)(7)(C) for ra ising his co,ncems. BOWERS claimed that n t :-::1ii (b;:;,)(71 7)'t" o':T".:'1"= 1m::""I'l:~a~ h i s safety concerns seemed to be based on the fact that his (BOWERS) na s listed on the NRC l ice nse and that he (b)(7)(C) could arrange to have i t removed. BOWERS claims that when he in f ormed the o 1s o ligation to resolve issues at t he site or begin steps to inform the NRC , the~ordered him to pack up his office and to get off of the site immediately. Ap r il 1 , 2011 , was the last day that BOWER S performed work for TI , but he was paid for accumulated overtime , sick and annual leave until August 1, 2011. These concerns were discussed during a March 16. 2011 , and May 16, 2011, NRC: RI Allegation Review Board (ARB). The ARB , to i nclude Regional Counsel , dete r mined that BOWERS had articulated a prima f acie case of discrimination and t hat BOWERS would be offered access to the NRC's Alternate Dispute Resolution (ADR) program or to have 01 investigate. BOWERS chose to pursue the ADR option. BOWERS and TI mediated on August 17, 2001, but did not reach a settlement and the issue was returned to RI for investigation (Rl-2 011-A-0019). On October 5, 2011, Region I Special Agent in Charge !(b)(?)(C) ~poke with BOWERS who confirmed that ADR mediation had failed and that he desired that 01 invest i gate his discrimination concern (Exhibit 2). ~~BLIC D1$CL0$1 l RE VVITM~ =~VAL OF : sPE , CHARGE , OFFICE OF 1 ( TNs , REG I O 1 Case No. 1-2 012-002 9 OFFICIAL USE ONLY 01 lf)JVESTIGATION INFORMATION Alle g ation: OFFICIAL USE ONLY 01 INVESTIGATION INFORMATION Discrimination Against a Former Radiation Safety Officer for Having Raised a Safety Concern A g ent's Summa ry of the Evidence Sworn Interview of Elbert "Bert Bowers" (Exhibit 16) On October 26, 2011, BOWERS was interviewed by 01:RI in Redwood City, CA, at which time, he provided detailed inf9.rmation regarding his claim of discrimination. BOWERS advised that he began employment with TT as the RSO on April 1, 2009. BOWERS further advised that prior to becoming an employee of TT, he was on site at the HPNSY since 2002, as an employee of New World Technologies (NWT). According to BOWERS, he began his employment in the nuclear industry in 1978 and has served in various positions over the years, such as an As Low As Reasonably Achievable (ALARA) eng i neer, Health Physicist Engineer IV and Training Instructor. BOWERS stated that he has worked at a number of fac ilities throughout the country to include Vermont Yankee, Palo Verde, Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site and Treasure Island. BOWERS indicated that he has comp l eted all American National Standards Institute (ANS I) 18-1 and 3.1 Qualiflcations and trainings (pp. 4 , 8-9, 12, and 13). BOWERS acknowledged that during his tenure at HPNSY , he has served as both the RSO and the RSOR , responsible for insuring regulatory license compliance. Prior to be i ng hired by n, BOWERS also served as the Project Manager for NWT at HPNSY. When BOWERS was initially hired by TT , he was actually listed as the Corporate RSO on the ir (TI) NRC Materials License. TT also maintained reporting responsibilities to both the NRC and the RASO, a component of the U.S. Navy. I n or about the summer of 2009, TT hired !(b)(7)(C) !to serve as the!(b){71{C) I at which t i me, BOWERS was designated as the RSOR for HPNSY (pp. 14 , 16 , and 26). I t was the testimony of BOWERS that on or about January 13, 20 11 , he met with the field supervisors who work for him regarding the results of his drive-down from the previous evening when the Pacific Gas & Electric worke

• D area with no technician. BOWE:RS laid fbe s, meo (isors later identified as (b)(7)(C) and !(b)(l)(C) that 1 if someone was sc e u e o wor a er . ours in an area efined on the HRA as n im acted area," he needed to know about it. According to BOWERS , it was at that t i me that (b)(7)(C) rebutted his (BOWERS) statement, by saying that the area was cleared already, thus it did not re uire the resence of a RAD Technjcjan BOWEJS stated that the discussion with the )\ l J intensified at which time 1 (=>)(7)(C)

_ got involved, however, he (b)(7)(C) agreed with l (b)(7)(C) I citing that the area in question was not a RAD area an I a een c eared (pp. 85-88). BOWERS identified a feeling of betrayal following the incident with!(b)(?)(C) !and the field supervisors. BOWERS stated th'at he followed !(b)(7)(C) !i his office and told him that he needed his !(b)(7)(C) I support. BOWERS testified that (b)(7)(C) told him that he appeared to be concerned with things because his name was on the license and that it could be PUBLIC OISCI OSI IRE 1/'JITI I~ =~~L OF SP!='. I T IN CHARGE, OFFICE OF INV I :; , REGI~ I Case No. 1-2012-002 10 OFFICIAL USE ONLY 01 INVESTIGATION IN F ORMATION ( OFFICIAL USE ONLY QI INVEST IGAT ION INFORMATION arranged to have him remove d from the license. BOWERS stated that he fel t threatened and asked !(b)(7)('.::) !if he wanted his (BOWERS) resignation , at which time ,!(b)(7)(C) I made some inappropriate sta tements , subsequently kicking BOWER offsi e. BOWERS advised that he then threatened to go to the NRC , at which time, (b)(?)(C) told him that he cou l d call but not from HPNSY (pp. 89-90). When questioned regarding any previous disciplinary issues, BOWERS identified that he did n ot have any, although he was the subject of a self-reporting by TI during an NRC inspection in the spring of 2011. BOWERS advised that he traditionally conducted RAD protection training and in the course of doing so, he accidentally left a radium button in a jar on the conference room table, while he went to lunch. BOWERS further advised that TI reported the aforementioned incident to the NRC. BOWERS was initially placed on paid administrative leave while an internal inve stigation was conducted as to the argument which ensued on the morning of January 13, 2011. In April 2011, BOWERS was subsequently transferred to NAS Alameda to serve in an administrative radiation overs i ght capacity. BOWERS stated that h i s work at Alameda concluded in the summer of 2011 , at which time he was required to take h is vacation and other forms of leave, before being placed on furloug h (pp. 68-71 and 74). Protected Activit y BOWERS advised 01 that his radiological safety concerns that are germane to his discrimination compla int were: (1) his observation during an evening drive down check of c raft workers onsite in what he believed to be a RAD area without the presence of a RAD technician, (2) his observation of a water cooler in an area denoted with RAD postings, and (3) generators/e ui ment being left out overnight. BOWERS raised the aforementioned safety concerns to (b)(7)(C) and to TT management (Exhibit 16 , pp. 39-49). Management Knowledge (b)(7)(C) said that BOWERS never raised safety concerns to him. (b)(?)(C) also said that he visited and met with BOWERS approximately three to four times . BOWERS talked about his work but never mentioned that he had safety concerns. (b)(?)(C) said he onl became aware of BOWERS' concerns post the argument between BOWERS µ,I\ and !(b)(7)(C) I on January 13, 2011 (Exhibit 15, pp. 28-31 ). ,-l (b--)17)-(C-) --1 !(b)(7)(C) !acknowledged that BOWERS raised what he believed to be minor issues in nature such as a water cooler being found slightly Inside the rope of an RCA. (b)(7)(C) a nuclear engineer by training with more than 24 *years experience in the industry e as oug the iss ues/concerns which BOWERS was raising were not legitimate concerns, which required immediate action; however , he instructed BOWERS to co rr ect the issues as to remain in compl iance and identify the issues to the staff at the morning safety meetings (Exh i b i t 12, pp. 8, 9 , and 22-25). Case No. 1-2012-002 11 OFF I CIAL USE Of"fLY OI INVESTIOATION INFORMA T I ON OFF I CIAL USE ONLY QI INVESTIGATION INFORMATION !(b)(7)(C) !testified that BOWERS did raise radiation safety concerns to him; however, there were never issues that were not corrected. !(b)(?)(C) !advised that BOWERS would often com lain about things that he thought were over the top such as signage. According to (b)(7)(C) BOWERS wanted to put up paper RAD postings as opposed to metal signs, throughout the site which would obviously fade and wear due to weather condi t ions; however, BOWERS advised !(b)(7)(C) !that he better identify if the technicians on site were switching the signs as required. (b)(?)(C) tso r ecalled ~OWE R S adyj fi i ng him of the incident wi t h the generator being le ou ovem1g . According to J b)(7)(C)it wasn't uncommon to have that occur with the generators , and hm advjsed B°]ERS to reiterate to the staff to pick all equipment up at the end of the work day. i b)(?)(C) _ advised that the generator was indeed picked up and placed in one of the buildings behind lock and key (Exhibit 18 , pp. 26-29). TI , HPNSY, !(b)(?)(C) l estified that the water cooler was approximately six Inches from the rope line and it was in that particular position due to it being close to a stock ile. (b)(7)(C) said the aforementioned concern was raised by BOWERS. According to (b)(7)(C) e issue was remedied when the water cooler was taken out of that area (E x hibit 25, p. 20). (b)(7)(C) HPNSY, TT, stated that BOWERS preferred to deal with (b)(?)(C) 1rect y an never rea y came to speak to me. !(b)(7J(C) tt hinks that BOWERS was safety oriented but " I never really saw him leave his office a whole lot" (Exhi bit 24. pp. 14-17). Adverse Act (s) BOWERS beljeves that he was discriminated against by TT management for being asked by !(b)(7)(C) I to resign fro m h j s posi t ion and he was ultimately placed on a furlough b,y n. BOWERS tes tified tha~(b)(7J(C) lt old him that he appeared to be concerned with things because his name was on the license and that it could be arran ed to have him removed from the license. BOWERS stated that he fr threatened and asked (b)(?)(C) if he wanted his (BOWERS) resig nation , at which time , (b)(l)(C) I made some mappropna e statements, subsequently kicking BOWERS offsite on J~nua ry 13. 2011. BOWERS advised that he then threatened to go to the NRC, at which time ,}b)(?)(C) I told him that he could call but not from HPNSY. In April 2011, BOWERS was subsequen tl y transferred to NAS Alameda to serve in an administrative radiation oversight capacity; working on procedures. BOWERS stated that his work at NAS Alameda concluded in the summer of 2011. at which time he was required to take his vacation and other forms of leave, before being placed on furlough by TT (Exhibit 16 , pp. 68-71, 74 , 89-90, and 94-101). On January 13 , 2011, BOWERS left HPNSY and was thereafter placed on administrative leave with pay. On February 1, 2011, BOWERS. was reassigned to a temporary assignment at NAS Alameda (Exhibit 5). Upon completion of the aforementioned assignment at NAS Alameda , BOWERS was forced to exhaust his paid vacation time , before being placed on furlough status. Case No. 1-2012-002 12 OFFICIAL USE ONLY 01 IN'v'ESTIOATION INFORMATION OFFICIAL USE ONLY -01 INVESTIGATION INF ORMATION Nexus: Was BOWERS Discriminated A g ainst for Havin g Raised Safet y Concerns? !(b)(l)(C) !said that BOWERS informed him that he (BOWERS) had been conducting h i s daily drive-~own when he observed craft level employees working in what he believed to be a RAD area. i b)(7)(C) I subsequently advised BOWERS to bring the issue up the following morning (January 13, 2011) at the 6:30 a.m. morning meeting. !(b)(7)(C) !stated that BOWERS missed the morning meet i ng and went to the wrong conference room despite the morning meet i ngs being held in the same conference room for approximately the last three or four years (Exhibit 18 , pp. 41-4.4). (b)(7)(C) believed that he (BOWERS) was upset because he (BOWERS) felt th,~.....,_ .... did not su oirt him i11 an exchan e/argument between BOWERS an )i,~c, (b)(7)(C) and ossibly (b)(7)(C) .___, __ __. concerning a possible RCA area on January 13, 2011. (b)(7)(C) intervene an ,o everyone t o settle down and o back to work in an effort to diffuse th~ s Wdatjon. lo hjs testimony to 01:RI , (b)(7)(C) stated that he also agreed with th ef.6k (c> !upon h i s intervention into the conversa 10n, citing that the area In uestion had already been radiologically cleared. I t was also the testimony of (b)(7)(C) that BO~ERS then foll owed h i m into his office and offered his BOWERS) resignat ion. a w 1c t ime he l (b)(7)(C) I accepted. Accordin t (b)(7)(C) BOWERS said: "well , without your support, then I'm resigning." (b)(7)(C) immediately accepted BOWERS' resignation and instructed BOWERS to get his things an d go (leave the site/HPNSY) (Exhibit 18 1 pp. 45-47 and 57-61; and E x hibit 9). !(b)(?)(C) I advised 01 that he and other f 6 m 1 t; !were discussing an issue on January 13 1 2011 , wherein BOWERS be l 1eve a th~ area 1n question was a RCA area and he and the othe~1 6~ nccJ I knew the area had been previously c leared. !(b)(7)(C) !added that he chastised BOWERS for spending too much time in his office and if he (BOWERS) had spent more time in the field he would have known the RCA was clear. l l b)(7)/C l !said that BOWERS subse uentl went into!(b)(7)(C) I office. !(b)(?)(C) !proceeded to stand outside (b)(7)(C) office door because he thought BbWERS may claim that he!(b)(7)(C) !had threatened ERS. !(b)(7)(C) I said that he overheard BOWE~$ making a statement "that he [BOWERS] could not --he could no longer go on workin at Hunters Point Naval Shipyard if he wasn't respected ,,.,when he's saying thls~'s yelling at (bJ(7)(C) I will give you my resignation right now and call the NRC. said , fine I accep resi nation but you're not calling the NRC from here. You go call them from your own phone .... " (b)(7)(C) opined that BOWERS was not discriminated against for raising safety concerns by ts (BOWERS') management (Exhibit 21 , pp. 24-25 , 33-39 , and 47; Exhibit 3; and Exhibit 9). ln:7'ro'i"'\-----,.,,..,......,...__,...-.,,...--,---...... ........ -.....J TI , testified that BOWERS complained to the " big time ," rei he called them out for supposed safety violations, which .... w_e-re-n"""'ot ,....a__,..u_a ... y...., vlolations. (b)(7)(C) estified that BOWERS thought that people were coming out of a particu la r RAD area, which they were not. !(b)(7)(C) !i ndicated to 01 that th e area in Case No 1-2012-002 13 OFFICIAL USE ONLY GI INVESTIGATION l~JFORMATION ( OFFICIAL USE ONLY -Of 1~4VESTIGATION INFORMATION question was cleared , which BOWERS should have known as RSOR (Ex hibit 27 , pp. 24 and 25; and Exhibit 9). !(b)(l)(C) !stated that an in ternal inquiry conducted by !(b)(?)(C) !could not come to a conclusive

• n ith respect to the uestion whether or not BOWERS offered his resignation to (b)(?)(C) or (b)(l)(C) requested that BOWERS resign from hjs posjtjor with TI and HPNSY and the tone of that conversation between BOWERS and l (b)(l)(C) j (Exhibit 15, p. 49). !(b)(l)(C) !test i fied that when he and !(b)(7)(C) !i nterviewed BOWERS he (b)(l)(C) asked BOWERS if he realized that the area on Crisp Road , which is where the workers we*re after ~,...,.u r ,aa.t s was already clea red radiolog i cally or what is known as " down-posted

." According to (b)(?)(C) BOWERS sa i d t

• wasn't down-posted because he RS} h ad not sent the final clearance paperwork to (b)(?)(C) to have it signed off on. (b)(?)(C) stated that BOWERS i nterpretat i on of the clearance process was i ncorrect at whjc~ time BOWE *
• ated to him that it was his (BOWERS) desire to start having!(b)(?)(C) j sign off on it. (b)(?)(C) indicated that BOWERS was unaware that ttie Crisp Road area had been down-posted, although he should have known because he was copied on the email notification which identified the down-posting of that area (Exhibit 15, pp. 43 and 44; and Exhib i t 9). !!b)(l)(C) j and l (b)(?)(C) !asked BOWERS to return to work durin the initial eriod i n wh i ch he was placed on administrati e following the argument wit ( and !(b)(?)(C) !at HPNSY. (b)(?)(C) said that BOWERS felt threatened and uncom ortable with return i ng , although he (BOWERS) was asked to return so that he cou ld ass i st management in address i ng and resolv i ng safety issues that he BOWERS had ra i sed (Exh i b i t 15, pp. 32 , 33 , and 38-40; and Exhibit 12 , pp. 49 and 59-62). After the January 13 , 2011 , argument between BOWERS and staff !(b)(?)(CJ l et al.), !(b)(l)(C) I sa i d an internal investigation was conducted by TI and " we>> made a determination to remove BOWERS from HPNSY based upon the personality conflicts and BOWERS' own statements at how uncomfortable he was on site at HPNSY , due largely , to a great deal of t ension between BOWERS and other personne l. l (b)(l)(C) !als o became aware of BOWERS' job performance deficiencies such as not attending the daily morning meetings , spending too much time in the office and not enough time in the field and poor i n te ractions with other TI employees.!(b)(l)(C) !sa i d the decision was made to offer BOWERS a_,!<6~x 7_x c.,...1 ,---__,...,......

______ __, temporary posit i on (no pay cut) at NAS Alameda (Exhibit 15 , pp. 52-55 , 63 , and 72-75). AGENT'S N OTE: On November 20 , 2012, 01 contacted Timothy MURPHY, legal cou ns el for TI supra, and he advised that although TI ndu cted an internal investi ation as to what happened between BOWERS ( *~ 1 staff and (b)(?)(C l on January 13 , 2011; TI did n , ot pro uce a art .. MURPHY a de t at TI management decided that even if BOWERS resigned f r om his pos i t i on; i t wasn't BOWERS i ntent to re sign even though BOWERS was APPROVAL OF SPECIAL AGENT IN CHARGE , OFFICE OF INVES Case No. 1-2012-002 14 OFFlmA L USE ONLY 01 INVE:STIGATION INFORMATION OFFICIAL USE ONLY QI INVESTIGAT I ON INFORMA I ION subsequently reassigned to a temporary position at NAS Alameda. MURPHY added that TI produced an audit report which he provided to 01 (Exhibit 30). !(b)(l)(C) !commented that TI is a project based organization and as TT wins a new contract n needs to staff up and converselY'. when projects come to an end TT must reduce staff, i.e., furlough and lay off employees. (b)(7)!C) said that BOWERS was placed into a furlough status because: " We didn't want to lay him off or return him [to HPNSY] for fear of retaliation. Of course, we've got a retaliation complaint anyway. And so we put him on a furlough status, he doesn't get ad but he's allowed to continue his benefits provided he pays his employee share ... " (b)(l)(C) sta ed when TT was awarded a new contract in Saudi A r ab i a , TT offered a position )\ ' o BOWERS; however, BOWERS declined TT's offer. According to was rn armed by 801/1/ERS that he BOWERS) was only interested in employment opportunities i n the Sa n Francisco Bay area. (b 7}(C) denied any knowledge of any TI employees who held grudges ~nd/or had any an i mus toward BOWERS fqr having ra i sed safety concerns. asked by 01 i f he believed BOWERS was discriminated for raising safety concerns , (b)(l)(C) repl i ed: " Absolutely not" (Exhibit 15 , pp. 16-18, 52 , 53 , 57-62 , and 67*71; Exhibit 5; Exhibit 1 O; and Exhibit 11). (b)(7)(C) said that BOWERS " was removed from the ro*ect at Hunters Point.. .. * --,---~~w~a __ s_a_w __ a_, re of BOWERS claims that (b)(7)(C) asked BOWERS to resign whereas (b)(7)(C) claims that BOWERS resigned from his TT position at HPNSY at his own behest/volit i on. (b)(7)(CJ added that BOWERS was temporary reassigned to work at the NAS Alameda and after approximately eight weeks the dredging operations ended " we [IT management] took him off that project.. .. " !(b)(7)(C) !also added that BOWERS was offered a position i n Saudi Arabia , Tennessee , and a sh term osition in Michigan , and BOWERS de c l i ned all of those employment opportunities. (b)(7)(C) said that he and TT management tried to find a position for BOWERS but BOWERS was not going back to work for TI at HPNSY because TT's workers at HPNSY d i d not have any respect for BOWERS. (b)(7)(C) pined that BOWERS was not discriminated against for raising safety concerns to his S') management (Exhibit 12, pp. 28, 29, 35, 41 and 49; Exhibit 5; Exhibit 10; a n d Exh i bit 11). (b)(7)(C) s ated that when he (b): 7 J(C) was first hired by TT BOWERS was very -......... --..-.... is (b)(7)(C) transition. (b)(7)(C) aid in contrast to the above, he (b)(7)(C) noticed t a ERS had some 1 ,cu y interacting with "other health physics supervisors" and !(b)(7J(C) tN as experiencing some job performance issues with BOWERS such as BOWERS' lack of involvement with attending meetings , and s endin too much time i n the office vice the field. As part of B_QWERS' performance appraisal (b)(7)(C) ttempted to solic i t feedback from employees who worked with BO

• 2010 an a rou le getting any kind of positive feedback on Bert [BOWERS] ... ." (b)(l)(C) acknowledged tha t he should have done a better job in documenting Job performance issues with BOWERS (Exh i bit 12 , pp. 20.22 , 27-28 , 30-35 , 53 , and 54; Exhibit 4; and Exhibits 6-8). !C b)(l)(C) I TI, HPNSY, said that he was told by!(b)(l)(C) !that BOWERS offered his resignation to!(b)(7)(C) l l!b)(7}(C) p pined that BOWERS was not retaliated Case No. 1-2012*002 15 OFFICIAL USE ONbY 01 IN\/i;ESTIGATION INFORMAT I ON OFFICIAL USE ONLY 01 INVESTIGATION INFORMATION against by TT management for engaging in NRC PA (Exhibit 14 , pp. 15 , 16 , 19 , 26 , 30 , 31 , 37-42, and 51). !(b)(7)(C) !t estified that he found BOWERS to be more interested in having an " I gotcha" type of mentality, wherein , he (BOWERS) thrived off of tripp i ng peop l e up or catching them in potent i al mistakes (Exhibit 14 , p. 30). !(bJ(?)(C)

I rr. HPNSY 1 testified that not only did BOWERS employ a " gotcha" attitude; he (BOWERS) also observed violations or potential violations and fai led to fix the m , in an effort to photograph the problems and then complain to management (E xhi bit 28 , pp. 25-35, 40 , and 40-52). learned from either!(b)(?)(C) l o r!(b)(?)(C) ~hat " he [BOWERS] just quit. He left site ....,..,...............,,... ... !(b)(?)(C) I was u n aware of any information that BOWERS was discriminated and/or retaliated against for engaging in NRC PA (Exhibit 24, pp. 15-17). l (b)(?)(C) I HP . _ ........................ ~tated that BOWERS had a way of b eing " condescending to people." Acco r ding t (b)(?)(C} he vast majority of employees who worked underneath BOWERS at NWT and TT oun t 1n uriating, i.e., BOWERS being condescendin . (b)(?)(C) opined that BOWERS was not good at his job (RSO/RSOR) at HPNSY. (b l(?)(C) asserted that BOWERS was not out in the field very much which he needed to be In order to be effective as an RS0R. !(b)(7)(C) !does not think that BOWERS was retaliated against by TT management for raising radiological safety concerns associated with TI's work at HPNSY (Exhib i t 23, pp. 17-28), Former NWT (b)(?)(C) orked directly for BOWERS when he served as Nie NWT Project Manage r. (b)(?)(C) advised tha t BOWERS was very adamant and stern about safety and he took it very serious y. (b)(?)(C) opined that BOWERS was discriminated against by TT management for ra,stng sa e y concerns but offered no evidence to support her view (Exhibit 17 , pp. 10, 11, 17 , and 18). !(b)(7)(C) !C&T labs (C TL), HPNSY , believed that BOWERS was retaliated against by 11 management for engaging in NRC PA; however, he acknowledged that he had no firsthand information/evidence that BOWERS was discrim i nated against (Exhibit 19 , pp. 12-16). !(b)(?)(C) !CTL , said that BOWERS had told her that he rais e d a safety co ncern (NFI) to his management and it was not well received , !(b)(?)(CJ !was unable to provide any additional relevant information to 01 concerning this investigation (Exhibit 20, pp. 13-19). !(b)(?)(C) 1 NWT , was not working at HPNSY and was gone approximately six months before BOWERS. (b)(?)(C) ffered no substantive information to 01 about BOWERS and/or this investigation (Ex 1 1t , pp. 20 and 21). C ase No. 1-20 12-002 16 OFFICIAL USE ONLY 01 INVESTIOATION INFORMATION OFFICIAL USE ONLY 01 INVESTIGATION INFORMAT ION (b)(?)(C) TI , served as the !(b)(?)(C) (b)(?)(C J for TI at HPNSY. b 7 c new w en BOWERS worke._d ,.., t"'"" o"""'r N~wr,..._-a .... t-~ HP . !(b l(7)(C) !thinks that he (b)(l)(C) left the site to go to work at another site for TI before BOWERS started working for . (bl (l)(C) said that he and BOWERS are friends and he l earned of BOWERS discrimination concerns with IT after the fact and acknowledged that he !(b)(7)(C) !was only aware of BOWERS' version of the events and not TI's, i.e., that BOWERS was discriminated against for engaging in NRC PA (Exhibit 26, pp. 6 and 15-22). Susan ANDREWS , former SR HP, AWS (subcontractor for IT), HPNSY , opined that BOWERS was discriminated against for raising safety concerns to TI management. ANDREWS offered no direct evidence to 01 that supported her opinion that BOWERS was retallated against for engaging in NRC PA (Exhibit 13, pp. 21-32 and 36). A g ent's Anal y sis of the Evidence BOWERS claims that he was discriminated against by Tetra Tech management for engaging in NRC PA; specifically he asserted that he was asked to resign from his position as RSO/RSOR at HPNSY by!(b)(?)(C) I for raising concerns about pos t ings, unlocked gates in RCAs and i tems left out i n and/or near RCAs. BOWERS claimed tha d (b)(7]C) !specifically requested his resignation after a heated exchange (an argument) on January 1 3, 2011 , and as a result he [BOWERS] was re-assigned as radiation supervisor (a temporary position and no loss of pay) at the NAS Alameda. BOWERS was subsequently furloughed by IT from his position at NAS Alameda on April 1 , 2011. ~~---...: c:.:.:la:.:.:, ims that he observed BOWERS,!(b)(?)(C) bnd othe~(bxtm I (b)(7)(C) and poss i bty!(b)(7)(C) !in a heated discussion and requested that they go back to wo r k on anuary 13, 2011. According to !(b)(7)(C J !BOWERS followed him into his l (b)(7)(C) I office and suggested that he!(b)(7J(C) !should support him. Although J b){7 JI C) I acknowledged that an argument ensued between them!(b)(?)(C) !and BOWERS ; it was BOWERS who volunta ril y resigned his position as RSO at HNPSY. As a result , (b)(7)(C) immediately accepted BOWERS' resi nation and asked BOWERS to ge t his things and leave the work area/premises. Additional! (b)(7)(C) claims that he overheard BOWERS stating that he resigned. 01 understands that (b)(7)(C) was engaged in an argument w i th BOWERS; however , absent any information to the contrary , 01 has no reason to question his (b)(?)(C) eracity. lo Oi's yjew, ras ed u on the reponderance of the evidence , i.e., t e tes ,many of both!(b)(?)(C) _ and (b)(7)(C) BOWERS , whether he intended to do so or not , eff~ctively resigned from his position as RSO/RSOR at HPNSY. 01 takes this view even if BOWERS made the decision to res i gn as RSO/RSOR in the " heat of the moment." Notwithstanding the controversy surrounding whether or not BOWERS offered a verbal resignation to!(b)(7)(Cl I 01 believes that it was IT's management righUprerogative to remove BOWERS from HPNSY, large l y based upon the arguments which took place on the morn i ng of January 13 , 2011 , work performance of BOWERS and BOWERS own statement(s) Case No. 1-2012-002 17 Q FFICIAL USE ONL Y GI INVES T IGATION INFORMATION OFFICIAL USE ONLY 01 INVESTIGATION INFORMATION that he was un c omfortable in returning to work at HPNSY. BOWERS was subsequently placed on administrat i ve leave (with pay), before his February 1, 2011, reassignment to the NAS, Alameda. BOWERS' temporary assignment at Alameda l asted a few months (until April 1 , 201 1) before he was inst r ucted by TT management to utilize his (BOWERS') paid vacation time , as he was not wo r king on an active project at that p o in t in time. l (b)(7)(C) I (b)(7)(C) A c cording to and TT attempted to assign BOWERS additional work assignments following NAS Alame a , however 1 BOWERS declined. Most notably, BOWERS was offe r ed a position as the RSOR for a project in Saud i Arabia, in addition to an a s signment in Michigan. BOWERS declined TT's employment offers , as well as stifled discussions regarding potential job offers from IT to work in Oak Ridge , TN. Documentary evidence obtained during t h i s i nvestigation disclosed that BOWERS' attorney; John SCOTT declined offers on h i s client's behalf c i ting that he (BOWERS) would only consider work assignments in th e S a n Fran c is c o Bay area. Despite IT management 's failure to adequately document alleged defi c ie n cies w i th BOWERS' j ob performance in 2009 and 2010 , 01 contends that a major factor why BOWERS was not allowed by TI management to resume his duties at H PNSY was based upon persona li ty c onflicts between BOWERS and his colleagues , and management 's decision to place him on an assignment , which would not be as combative or tenuous. BOWERS' position at NAS Alameda was clea r ly a temporary position and TI offered other posit i ons to BOWERS which he refused to accept; a de c is i on presumably solely made by BOWERS. 01 also c ontends that if TI management wanted to discriminate/retaliate against BOWERS why did n management offe r BOWERS a position at NAS Alameda and/or anywhere else with the organization. Thus , 0 1 does not believe that BOWERS was discriminated for raising safety concerns to TI management. 0 1 t h in ks that i t's important to not e that BOWERS was extremely concerned about the craft employees working in a RAD area , when the fact of the matter was that the area had previously been down-posted, and BOWERS was on the email distribution list documenting that action , thus , h e shou l d have been aware of that fact. BOWERS' misunderstanding of so~;t.J?i~A that he should have been aware of , led to the argument s between BOWERS and the (' 1 ' r lt'NCJ j and subsequently BOWERS and (b)(7)(C) .__ ___ _, Conclu s ion Ba s ed upon the evidence developed during the investigation , 01: RI did not conclude that BOWERS was discriminated against for having raised safety concerns. CHARGE , OFFICE OF INVESTI Case No. 1-2012-002 18 OFFICI/\L USE ONLYŽ 01 INVESTISATION INFO~MATION Exhibit No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 OFFICIAL USE ON L Y QI INVESTIGATION INFORMATION LIST OF EXHIBITS Description Investigation Status Record, dated October 7 , 2011 (1 page). Allegation Review Board Summary and Allegation Receipt Report, multiple dates (9 pages). " Statement of Events In the Vicin i ty of Bert BOWERS' Office on January 13 , 2011 ," dated January 17 , 2011(2 pages). Memorandum froni!(b)(7)(C) (b)(?)(C) TT , to!(b)(?)(C) (b)(?)(C) 1 SU ~: "Futur'-e ,-A:-s-s':"'" ig-nm-en--=t-o...,,.f-=B ,....e....,...... rtB""'O ,..., W'"" E .. R-s--to-, A""'P..,S ... ,-u-da..,.te-a ..... , _ __. May 12, 2011 (2 pages). Memorandum to BOWERS , sub j: " Temporary Assignment to Radiological EMAC Projects at former NAS Alameda in Alameda , California ," dated February 1 , 2011 (5 pages). BOWERS' Performance Appraisal, dated December 4, 2009 (6 pages). BOWERS' Performance Appraisal, dated November 24, 2010 (6 pages). "Memo to File ," subj: "Performance Appraisal for Bert BOWERS for Year 2011," dated November 21, 2011 (1 page). E-mail messages to TT Staff Personnel from!(b)(?)(C) I !(b)(?)(C) !Advising of Concurrence to Backfill Trenc 1 hes in Work Areas , Which Was Radiologically C leared , dated January 6 , 2011 (4 paQeS). --E-mail messages between (b)(?)(C) nd BOWERS, subj: (b)(?)(C) voice message to BOWERS dated Dec ember 11 , dated December 11, and January 4 , 2012 (2 pages). E-mail from John H. SCOTT , Scott Law F i rm, Legal Counsel for BOWERS , to Timothy MURPHY , Legal Counsel for TI , dated September 2 , 2011 (1 page). . . J (b)(?)(C) I Transcribed Interview 01 1 dated. May 24, 2012 (66 pages). Transcribed Interview of A NDREWS , dated October 26 , 2011 (40 pages), : NOT FOR PUBLIC DISCl OSI IRE WIT I I~ =L OF SP C IAL AGENT IN CHARGE. OFFICE OF INV I , REGION I Case No. 1-2012-002 19 OF FIC I AL HS~ONLY 01 INVESTIGATION INF ORMATIO N OFFICIAL USE ONLY QI INVESTIGATION INFORMATION 14 Transcribed Interv i ew o~(b)(?)(C) I dated February 9 , 2012 (52 pages). 15 Transcribed Interview o (b)(?)(C) dated February 9 , 20 1 2 (77 pages). 1 6 T r anscribed Interview of BOWERS , dated Octobe r 26, 2011 (114 pages). 17 18 1 9 20 2 1 (b)(7)(C) Transcribed Interv i ew of L...-_ ___,j dated October 25 , 2011 (34 pages). Transc r ibed Interv i ew of!(b)(?)(C) ! dated February 9 , 2012 (92 pages). Transcribed Interview ot!(b)(?)(C) I dated October 27 , 2011 (17 pages). Transcrihed Interview ot!(b)(?)(C) I dated October 27, 2011 (21 pages). . J (b)(7)(C) I Transcribed Interview 01 1 dated February 7 , 2012 (63 pages). 2 2 Transcr i b e d lriterv i ew o (b)(?)(C) dated October 26 , 2011 (33 pages). 23 24 2 5 26 27 28 Transcribed Interview o~(b)(?)(C) Transcribed Interview of !(b)(?J(C) T ranscribed Interview of (b)(?)(C) !dated February 9, 2012 (41 pages). !dated February 8 , 2012 (25 pages). dated February 7, 2012 (39 pages). ==__, Transcribed Interview of (b)(7)(C) Transcribed Interview o (b)(?)(C) Trans c ribed Interview of (b)(l)(C) dated November 1, 2011 (24 pages). dated February 8 , 2012 (34 pages). dated February 7, 2012 (52 pages). 2 9 NRC Safety Inspection Report and Compliance Inspection, dated April 29 , 2011 (2 pages). 30 TI " Radiation Safety Annual Audit Report ," surveillance dates January 18-21 , 2011 (26 pages). NT IN CHARGE , O F FICE OF INVESTIGA Cas e No. 1-2012-002 20 OFFICIAL USE ONLY 01 INVESTIGATION INFORMATION OFFICIAL USE ON L Y -QI INVESTIGATION INFORMATION NAC ADVISEMENT ON IDENTITY PROTECTION This advisement is provided to clarify the degree of protection which can be afforded by the NRC to a concerned citizen making an allegation

In reSQlving technical issues, the NRC in protecting your identity Intends to take all reasonable efforts to not disclose your Identity to any organization, Individual outside the NAC, or the public unless:

• You have clearly indicated no objection to being identified.
• Disclosure is necessary because of an overriding safety issue.
• Disclosure is necessary pursuant to an order of a court or NAC adjudicatory authority or to inform Congress or State or Federal agencies in furtherance of NAC responsibilities under law or public trust.
• Disclosure is necessary in furtherance of a wrongdoing investigation , including an investigation of harassment and intimidat i on (H&I) allegations.
• Disclosure is necessary*to support l1l hearing on an enforcement matter.
• You take actions that are inconsistent with and override the purpose of protecting your identity. If your allegation is that you have been discriminated against for having raised safety concerns , the NRC will normally disclose your identity during an NAC investigation if you are the victim of the discrimination. For allegations involving other wrongdoing (e.g., record falsification or other conduct in violation of NRC regulatory requirements), your identity may be disclosed at the NAC's discretion in order to pursue the investigation. Information provided under the Freedom of Informat i on Act (~OIA) will, to the extent consistent with tha t act, be purged of names and other potential identifiers; however, disclosures may be necessary under this act. I --=Gi-='-::..:~=:..........:

&=-~-TSa.w=--==:.... t?/1>___:;_ ____ __, fully understand the degree of protection of my i dentity as expla i ned in this document Date:/2 .~G, / I UI:)~ (b)(7)(C) (Concerned Citizen) Witness:..L...---------r,,.,.,.,,,..,.,.,...---..,.._ ____ _ l (b)(7)(C) I OFFICIAL USE ONLY -Of INVESTIGATION INFORMATION NRC OFFICE OF INVESTIGATIONS INVESTIGATIVE PLAN CASE NO.: 1-2012-002 TITLE / FACILITY: H & I/ Hunters Point Naval Shipyard ALLEGATION: The Cl formerly served as the Rad i ation Safety Officer {RSO) and RSO, Representative (RSOR) for Tetra Tech EC, Inc., the primary contractor at the Hunters Point Nava l Shipyard Decommissioning site in San Francisco, CA has alleged that he was removed from HPNSY for raising safety concerns to management. SUBJECTS: Elbert " Bert" BOWERS (Alleger) POSSIBLE VIOLATIONS: INVESTIGATIVE ISSUES: 10 CFR 50.7 (Employee Protection) 10 CFR 50.5 (Deliberate Misconduct) Was RSO Bert BOWERS terminated for raising safety concerns at the HPNSY? INVESTIGATIVE STEPS: -Interview Cl. -Interview members of management. -Interview other officers with a knowledge of the safety concern and subsequent reporting thereof. -Obtain CR and other system generated documents associated with the issues reported by Cl. -Interview officers who may have also reported safety corncerns or been involved in an equitable way. -Obtain internal audit report as well as NRC safety inspection report (b)(7)(C) Prepared by: Special gen (b)(7)(C) Field Office Director ,o z1,j11 Date Date CASENO.: DATE 10/10/2011 10/14/2 011 J 0/31/2011 11/07/2011 11/21/2011 12/19/2 011 02/17/2 012 02/28/2012 OFFICIAL USE ONLY 01 INVESTIGATION INFORMATION CASE CHRONOLOGY 1-2012-002 1 OPENED: 10/07/2011 I AGENT: l (b)(7)(C) ITEM 1 1 I l 1 ] 1 ACTIVITY Reporting agent attempted to cont a ct alleger Bert BOWERS yja both email and telephone, leaving messages through b oth mechanisms. Contact was initiated by the reporting agent in an effort to sche dule the alleger interview in this matter. On Wedne s da y October 12, 2011, reporting agent received a return call and email from alleger Bert BOWERS, who confirmed to meeting with the reporting agent for the purpose of initial interview on Wednesday October 26, 2011, in Redwood City, CA. Between the time period s covering 10/25/11 and ! 0/27 /11, reportin g agent interviewed alleger Elbert "Bert" BOWERS , along with five other individual s who are currently or were previously employed at Hunters Point Naval Shipyard, by either Tetra Tech EC, Inc. (TT) or a subcontractor to IT. On Tuesday November 1, 2011, reporting agent interviewed former Tectra Tech l (b)(?)(C) Hunters Point Naval Shipyard)!(b)(7)(C) I m J (b)(?)(C) I Oo Wednesda y evening November 16,201 l j reporting~agent received a voice mail message from State of California, Deputy L abo r Commissioner Kathy DALEY. DAL EY advised that her office wa s investigating the matter of wrongful termination filed by E lbert "Bert" BOWERS, former Radiation Safety Officer at Tetra Tech EC , INC. DALEY further advised of some safety co ncern s which she had and some critical in formation that she desired to share with the NRC. Reporting agent forwarded the voicemail messag e to the RI m wh o, in turn, sent it to the appropriate technical staff personnel and Office of Regional Counsel, for further review. This investigation continues. -(b)(7) . d hr lQL__ rev1ewe c ons. (b)(7) (C) reviewed case chrons -SA needs to update chroiis From February 6-l 0, 2012, reporting a ge nt conducted 9 interview s with members of the management and leader shi p team at T e tra Tech EC, In c. The interviews were held in conj unction with parallel interviews also performed by the State of OFFICIAL USE ONLY* OI INYESTIGATION INFORMATION I OFFICIAL b.,::ri ONLY OI INVESTIGATION INFORMA.T J ON CASE CHRONOLOGY CASE NO.: 1-2012-002 OPENED: 10/07/2011 I AGENT: l (b)(l)(C) I DATE ITEM ACTIVITY 02/28/2 01 2 California , Department of Labor, at their facility in downtown Sao Francisco , CA. Interviews were conducted separately, which accounts for such the extended period of time utiliz ed for the interviews , and were in the pre sence of Tetra Tech l egal counsel Tim MURPHY , Esq. from the Law firm of FISHER, PIID..LIPS , LLP Testimony provided by management personnel was fairly consiste nt , wherein it was con:finned that BOWERS wa s furloughed in th e summer of 2 011 after being transferred from Hunters Point Naval Shipyard to Alameda. BOWERS was offered subsequent work as recently as the fall of 2011, however , thos e jobs were in Saudi Arabia and Oak Ridge , TN. BOWERS declined both offers citing a desire to remain in the San Francisco Bay Area. This investigation continues pending supplemental management interviews. 03/30/2 012 1 SA needs to update chrons. review Reporting agent reached contacted Tetra Tech!(b)(?)(C) 03/3 0/2012 2 I !(b)(?)(C) !who agreed to be interviewed. !(b)(7)(C) !did advise of his desire to have counsel and indicated that his atto rney would call the reporting agent with per s pectiv e interview date s. This investigation c ontinue s pending further investigative efforts. 04/09/2 012 1 Reporting agent has contact Tetra Tech!(b)(?)(C) b.pprox.imately three times since March 30, 2012, however messages were left twice with no subsequent return received by 01 to date. Reporting agent intends to contact previously interviewed individuals within the Tetra Tech Management Chain, in an effort to locate!(b)(?)(C) ! This investigation continues. 04/30/2012 l ~' eviewed. 05/30/2012 1 On May 24 , 2012, reporting agent interview Tetra Tech EC, INC.!(b)(7)(C} I l (b)(7)(C) l at hi s office 4 (b )(?)(C) (b)(7)(C) I w as BOWERS'!(b)(?)(C) w'ing his tenure of employment with T e tra Tech at Hunters Point Naval S hipyard. (b)(7) 05/30/2012 2 (C) reviewed OFFICIAL USE ONLY OI INVESTIGATION JNFORMATION OFFICIAL U-,,..,, ONL'f -01 INVESTIGATION INFORMAtlON CASE CHRONOLOGY CASE NO.: 1-2012-002 I OPENED: 10/07/2011 I AGENT: l (b)(7)(C) I DATE ITEM ACTMTY 06/29/2012 1 Interview transcript of!(b)(7)(C) !w as recently received and will be reviewed on today. Based upon investigative case priorities (parti cularly, the closing ROI and process associated with case No. 1-2012-001), reporting agent did not satisfy the nine month metric regarding this case. Reporting agent is also awaiting additional documentation from the lega l representatives for Tetra Tech, as su ppl emental documentation has been requested. A draft ROI will be prepared upon comp l ete review of all subsequent transcripts and d ocumentation. (b)(7) 06/29/2012 2 (C) eviewed 08/01/2012 I Closing ROI has been submitted to ss~(ti)(?)(C) I for editorial review and amendements where necessary. 09/11/2012 1 I 10/18/2012 1 ~eviewed case chroos and did case review witb SA. Rewritteoirevised ROi is ut to be submitted to SAIC for revie w. 1 l/20/2012 I TC: Tim MURPHYi Attorney for Tetra Tech (TT), stated that although (TT) conducted an internal investigation as to whether or not Bert BOWERS res i gned; no written report was produced. MURPHY added that an audit was conducted which resuhed in a written report. QI requested the audit written report. 11/26/2012 1 TC: Tim MURPHY, OI again requested that he provide TT's audit report to OI. 11/27/2012 1 MURPHY provided a copy of the TT audit report to 01. Case Agent added th e audit report to the ROI and s ubmitted same for closure. OFFICIAi. USE OJ!JLY OI INVESTIGATIOJS ffi:FORMUIO~ STA TE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS DIVISION OF LABOR STANDARDS ENFORCEMENT RETALIATION COMP~INT INVESTfGATION UNIT 455 Golden Gate Avenue, 1oth Floor San Francisco, CA 94102 Fax : (415)703-4130 October 20 , 2011 Tetra Tech Ee , Inc. 1230 Columbia Suite 750 San Diego, CA 92101 Re: State Case No. 23564-SFRCI

Bowers v Tetra Tech

Dear Respondent:

( Edmund G. Brown Jr., Governor The above-named Complainant filed a complaint with this Division alleging he/she suffered unlawful retaliation in violat i on of Labor Code section(s)

6310. A copy of Complainant's declaration is enclosed for your information.

A conference may be scheduled in connection with subject case. A hearing is run.usually conducted as part of the investigation Please provide documents and a list of witnesses you wish to submit in support of your response. Any and all evidence, documents, position statements, and witness lists should be prepared i n duplicate and submitted to me at the above address by November 7, 2011. Witness lists should include the witness' name, address , telephone number and a short statement describing the information the witness may provide. It is important that you provide all evidence and supporting documents that you wish to be part of the record as the decision may be based on the ev i dence and supporting documents in the file. A copy of the information you submit may be provided to Complainant for response. In your response , please identify the legal entity (owner) for the business and specify the name and address of the person authorized to accept legal service ~provide a copy of your corporate registration or business license. Very truly yours , Catherine Daly Deputy Labor Commissioner RC l_7 RSP L TR -'d f . d . d T T h . d l (b)(?)(C)

24. Please prOVI e a copy o warnings an repriman s etra ec issue relating to health, safety, or retaliation. ...._ _____ ___. 25. Please list all Tetra Tech employees, or other cont.act employees, at the Hunters Point worksite for the two year proceeding and following Bowe rs termination with discipline issues similar to those leading to Bowers' termination.

Identify these employees by name, title, discipline issue, and action taken. 26. Please list all Tetra Tech employees, or other contact employees, at the Hunters Point work site terminated in the two years preceding and following Bowers' termination. Please identify these employees by name , title, hire date, and issue leading to termination. 27. Please provide a copy of Tetra Tech's written discharge policies.

28. Please provide a copy of Tetra Tech's grievance procedures.

29. Please provide a list of all employees who have work-eel at any time under decision makers !(b)(7)(C)

~uring Bowers employment with Tetra Tech Please identify them by name, title, hire date, and current employment status. 30. Please provide a list of all persons involved in making the specific decisions to which Bowers complains. State each person by job title and responsibility as it related the issues Bowers raised. 31. Please provide a copy of Tetra Tech's business license or other incorporation documents. :23654 Supplemental Questions to RSP Tetra Tech, EC.docx ( u. Please explain what, if any, discipline Tetra Tech issued Bowers for his verbal outburst against Bowers. 12. Please provide an organizational chart showing reporting relationships during Bowers' employment tenure with Tetra Tech at Hunters Point. 13. Please provide an organizational chart showing reporting relationships post Bowers' employment tenure with Tetra Tech at Hunters Point. 14. Please identify management personnel at Tetra Tech to whom Bowers brought safety violations complaints at the Hunters Point worksite.

15. Please identify all governmental entity safety violations issued against Tetra Tech at the Hunter's Point worksite in the two years proceeding and following Bowers' termination.

Please list the date, description, fines imposed, remedies ordered, and your compliance with those remedies and fines. 16. Please name all known employees and individuals who complained about health or safety concerns at the Hunters Point for the two year proceeding and following Bowers' termination. Please list by name, title, complaint date, issue involved, and current employment status (if employees).

17. Please provide a copy of Tetra Tech's safety procedures at the Hunters Point worksite.

18. Where were these safety procedures listed? Who was supposed to provide training?

How often was this training provided 19. Please provide a copy of Bowers perfonnance evaluation for each year he worked for Tetra Tech.

• 20. Please provide a copy of warnings and reprimands that Tetra Tech's Industry Inc has issued to Bowers. l (b)(7)(C) I 21. Please provide a copy of warnings and reprimands Tetra Tech issued '------..1 relating to health, safety , or retaliation.

Pl .d f . d . ds T ..,. h . d l (b)(l)(C) 22. ease proV1 ea copy o wanungs an repnman etra -' ec issue ._ _____ _. relating to health, safety, or retaliation.

23. Please provide a copy of warnings and repr i mands Tetra Tech issued l (b)(?)(C) I relating to health, safety, or retaliation.

>3654 Su p plrmtntal Que s tions io RSP Ttltra Ttc:h, EC.doC'JC Pagt ,;a of 3 STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF INDUSI'RIAL RELATIONS DIVISION OF LABOR STANDARDS ENFORCEMENT R e taliation C omplaint Investigation Unit 455 Golden Gate Ave, 10tb Floor San Francisco, CA 94102 Tel: (415) 703-4841 Fax: (415) 703-4130 cdaly@dir.ca.gov October 20, 2011 Supplemental Questions Re: State Case 23564: Bowers v Tetra Tech EC, Inc. ( Arnold Schwarzenegger, Gooemor 1. Please respond to Bowers' allegation Tetra Tech EC ("Tetra Tech") managers allowed laborers to work with radiological mat~rials without adequate supervision.

2. Please respond to Bowers' allegation Tetra Tech managers deliberately cut his hours so he could not perform all the required safety inspections.

3. Please respond to Bowers' allegation Tetra Tech managers deliberately added a morning meeting to schedule so he could not perform all the required evening safety inspections.

4. Please explain why Tetra Tech did not consult with Bowers in his Radiation Safety Officer Representative (RSOR) role before agreeing to Navy's cutbacks in the RSOR position.

5. Please identify who replaced Bowers on the NRC issued license at Hunters Point. Please also provide the replacement's certification and training 6. Please provide the two most recent Memorandum of Understandings

("MOl.r) Tetra Tech signed with the United States Navy ("Navyj regarding Hunters Point. 7. P l ease respond to allegations the recent MOUs regarding Hunters Poin t Tetra Tech signed with the Navy guarantees Tetra Tech a bonus if it finishes the project early. 8. Please exp l ain why f b)(7)(C) !and other Radiation Protection Field Supervisors believe laborers could wor k iii Parcel E near the 'Triangle Area' and the RSY4" wi t h radiological materials without supervision from an authorized user listed on the NRC license. 9. P l ease explain why!(bi(?)(C) 10. Please explain why!(b)(7)(C) verbally assaulted Bowers. !did not cut off l ... 'b-)(?-)(_C_) ___ _,, verbal assault of Bowers. !terminated and escorted Bowers offsite after (b)(?)(C) :i 3 6 5 4 Supp/emtnca/ Questions to RSP Tetra Tech, EC.docx Page, o!J STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARlMENT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS DIVISION OF LABOR Sf ANDARDS ENFORCEMENT Retaliation Complaint InvestigaHon Unit 455 Golden Gate Ave, 10th Floor San Francisco, CA 94102 Tel: (415) 703-4841 Fax: (415) 703-4130 cdaly@dir.ca.gov October 20, 2011 By E-Mail (PDF) Timothy Murphy, Partner Fisher & Phillips, LLP One Embarcadero Center, Suite 2340 San Francisco, CA 94m Re: Bowers v Tetra Tech EC, Inc. State Case 23564-SFRCI

Dear Mr. Murphy:

( Arnold Schwar..enegger, Governor I write to inform you Bert Bowers filed a Division of Labor Standards Enforcement (DLSE) retaliation complaint alleging Tetra Tech, EC ("Tetra Tech i violated Labor Codes §§1102.5 and 6310 by improperly reducing his duties and eveotuaUy wrongfully terminating him. Specifically Bowers alleged Tetra Tech's supervisors purposely (t) reduced bis hours to prevent his safety oversight of the work site; (2) hid from him their improper use of laborers to perform tasks not under the s upervision of RAD Field Supervisors

and (3) verbally assaulted him, and essentially threw him offsite, when he confronted the supe.rvisors about these and other potentially illegal practices.

The DLSE will add the Labor Code §uo2.5 violation because prior to his termination Bowers attended a DI.SE s onsored conference with Tetra Tech supervisors present to support his former coworker (b)(?)(C) I enclose a copy of Bower's declaration for your review, our form letter, and a pamphlet explain i ng the procedures we follow when investigating such claims. J also include a set of supplemental questions for you to answer. I will need your evidence, documents, position statement. supplementa1 responses and witness list by November 7, 2ou. As part of your response, please identify the legal entity {owner) for the business and the person authorized to accept legal service. Sincerely, :-.ly s o er peputy Labor Commissioner Retaliation Complaint Unit .... _ ( MEMORANDUM To:._l (b-)(7-)(C_) ____ _,~etraTech,._l (b_)(7_)(C_*) ______________ ---1 From: Bert Bowers. Tetra Tech, RacHatlon SlfetyOfflc:er Representative-Hunters Point Date: January 18, 2m1 2:D P l 7/;J)II

Subject:

HIIIJWi pq1nt$blllllw JI fflPSI, Illa JG EC (MCI blPII J.Mdkll MP 1P PDYMY 13. 2011 !(b )(7)( C) *bdbi (RSql} IP PIA Offlci I Yatl 1ft Prplect In reference 1D the subject line above-and as requested during our dtscusslons earlier on Monday, January 1,., to foUow is a detalled summary of ewnts as ttaey unfolded January 12* -13 111* As always, feel free tD contact me if addllional Information orfeedbact-is needed. Reprds, 02:J____......_ Bert Bowers, Radiation Safety Offk:er Reprcsentalive lb X lXC) ; r)();(C) t Main: 415.671.1990 / Moblle: ... l (b-)(7-)(C-) ____ ...... Pase1o f7 ( STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS DMSION OF LABOR STANDARDS ENFORCEMENT Give a written statement answering each of the questions in the space provided*below. After answering these questions, if you wish, you may also attach additional sheets to provide a more detailed description of the circumstances of the retaliatory act. 1 . Protected activity (What did you do that caused your employer to retaliate against you?) While retained by Tetra Tech EC , Inc from March 30, 2009 to present , I oversee licensed and regulatory mandated tasks so as to confinn continued compliance with criteria as detailed in 10CFR20, *s1andards for Protection against Radiation*. A series of declining compHance trends -as reoenUy Identified and attached -present potential regulatory deficiencies specific to the reliable and continued safety of the project employees, 1he public, and the environment Dat f _ ... _~_.., . . Jan 12, 2011 e O pruW\iU.U activity:------2. Employer knowledge (How did your employer know you engaged in a protected activity?) lnltlaUy by way of verbal notification, &-malls, foUow-up attempts based on concems voiced by others (present and past project employees voicing concerns. Navy/State/City representatives po&lng regulatory based questions , etc). 3. Jan 12, 2011 Date of employer knowledge:

---

Adverse action (What did your employer do to you betause you enga g ed in a protected activity?)

I n performing duties associated with the vested role of Project Radiation Safety Officer Representative (e.g., addressin the rlor de s communication deficiencies related to ==~~=~:':~~e attacks after which the (b)(7)(C) =~~:,~ater -............ .................................................. (b)(7)(C)_ threatened me (said he could arrange to hav Radiation ~~cer Representative), then foUowed by profanely ordering me to pa~ my office and get off his project (reference attacnment initially provided direct report f b)(7 1(C) ~-D f d _...i Jan 13 , 2011 ate o a verse .... on:-------I certify under penalty of perjury. wtder 1he laws of the State of California. that 1he foregoing is true and comet EXECUTED ON, July 13, 2011 AT San .Francisco, CALIFORNIA SIGNATURE ~*8~ DLSl!20S (REV. 1112010). Rl!TAUATION COMPLAINTIENGUSH ..jk* ( RETALIATION COMl -..AINT Bowers. El>ert G (Bert) './ I I lSEX WHl!ltl! YOU WOllDDJPDIPl'EUH1'11WI ABOYli Hunters Point Naval Shipyard 200 Fasher Ave. San Francisco, CA 941' $54.27 I hour PD WEIIIC 50 NIA NIA Ukety Aug '1~ (b)(7)(C) IFYIS-UAT& OIJi>t~~~?f,!185~ YII NAME AND-rm..11 0tr 1'1!UON Yes No 'YOU tlCITU'Y"Y OIB.Dff\.oYl!ll.O' ~TOl'll.z A Q.\1111 WDIITHII! July 13, 2011 (b)(7)(C) initial verbal; (b)(7)(C) 18.2011/documented -Tetra Tech EC , ~1 (b)(?)(C) ! Hunter& Pl (Initially) l1!MJ!DY Ae'YOO IEl!EIMG mllOIJGR111S Reinstatement oft) Hunters Point RSOR position, 2) lost CTOTTWOP/OT wages; related remedies as provided by law. US Nuclear Regulatory Commission NAME DU l!lOS (RBV. I lfJIOIO) (800) 432-115'6 ext 5222 ES Mr. Bert Bowers Rl-2011-A-0019 (b)(7)(C)

Subject:

Concerns You Raised to the NRC Regarding Tetra Tech EC, Incorporated

Dear Mr. Bowers:

This letter pertains to nine concerns tha t you raised to the NRC in your electronic mail messages to Mr. Rick Munoz of our Region IV office on January 31 and February 1, 2011, regarding Tetra Tech EC, Incorporated. You expressed concerns related to health physics practi'ces and alleged discrim i nation at the Hunters Point Decommissioning Project. ln addition to the information you provided us on those dates, you provided additional information to us in various telephone discussions With Region I staff, electronic mail messages, and a large binder of information that you mailed to us on April 26 , 2011. Based on that information , we have revised your concerns as described in Enclosure

1. We have addressed and responded to eight of your nine concerns as noted in Enclosure

1. We note that you have signed an agreement to mediate via Alternative Dispute resolution (ADR) with Tetra Tech regarding your discrimination concern (Concern 1). The NRC w i ll continue to monitor your discrimination concern. Should you have any additional questions, or if the NRC can be of further assistance in this matter , please call me or one of my associates toll-free via the NRC Safety Hotline at 1-800-432-1156, extension 5222. S i ncerely, Richard J. Urban Senior Allegation Coordinator

Enclosure:

As Stated CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED 'l"'-2 O 1 2 }.t O O 2 *- Mr. Bert Bowers Distribution: Allegation File No. Rl-2011-A-0019 2 DOCUMENT NAME: G:\ORA\ALLEG\STATUS\20110019st1.docx Rl-2011-A-0019 To receive a copy of this document, indicate in the box: *c* = Coo v without attachment/enclosure "E" = Co ov with attachment/enclosure " N" = No coo v OFFICE DNMS:DLB I ORA:SAC l I l I NAME J Joustra R Urban DATE I /2011 I /2011 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY ENCL0SURE1 Rl-2011-A-0019 Concern 1: You asserted that you experienced a hostile work environment and discrimination after r a isin g radiological safety concerns and addressing the subsequent need for improved and tim~ly communications related to radiological controls in the field at Hunters *

• You stated that you we r e repeatedly berated by one of the Tetra Tech (b)(7)(C)

!(b)(7)(C) k the last instance occurring in the presence of the Tetra Te.._c_,.h ............... .--------1 during a fie ld supervisory staff meeting. You also sta ted that the (b)(7)(C) told you that your safety concerns seemed to be based on the fact that your name was listed on the license and that he could arrange to have it removed; later upon advising him of your obligation to 1) resolve the issues at hand or 2) begin steps to inform the NRC , he o rdered you to pack up your office and to get off the project s ite immediately. Introduction for Concerns 2 -9 The NRC performed an inspection at Tetra Tech EC, Inc .. Hunters Point Shipyard, from Mar ch 29 -31, 2011. The results of this Inspection are documented in In spection Report 03038199/2011002, which was issued on April 29, 2011. The cover letter and inspection report is available for review on the NRC Website at http://www.nrc. g ov/readin g-rm/adams.html; (ADAMS); the referenced documents can be found with a Web-based ADAMS search, using the advar:,ced search feature with accession numbers ML 111230127 and ML 111230163 under document properties. Concern 2: You asserted that a Radiologically Controlled Area (RCA) sig n appeared intentionally t urned down (i.e., not visible) in a "Parcel E" area (also referenced in Concern 3) that required the signage. NRC Assessment The inspector observed many posted areas during the insp ection. The inspe ctor did not see any RCA signs that were turned down in areas that required the signage. All areas appeared to be properly posted. NRC Conclusion Based on the above, the NRC concluded that signage was properly posted in required areas. Concern 3: You asserted that on multiple occasions a water station was set up inside a "Pa rcel E" RCA without following proper protocol. 1 EXHIBIT 3 0 -*** PAGE.....3._ OF J..? : * - ENCLOSURE 1 Rl-2011-A-0019 NRC Assessment As part of the inspector's tour of the work areas at Hunter's Point, several water stations set up in the field were observed. The inspector did not see any water stations inside any RCA areas. In addition, the inspector reviewed incident reports and found none indicating any incidents in which a water station was improperly set up. The inspector also reviewed the controlling procedure describing how to set up a water station; it was found to be adequate. NRC Conclusion Based on the above, the NRC concluded that all water stations were properly set up and none were found in any RCAs. Concern 4: You asserted that vehicles leaving the RCA after normal working hours may not have followed the proper procedures for egress. NRC Assessment The inspector reviewed the procedure for vehicles leaving an RCA and it was found to adequately describe what was required. The inspector also observed several vehicles leaving RCAs. The procedu r e was followed every time. The inspector also interviewed personnel working the egress points as to their knowledge of the egress procedure. All personnel appeared to understand their responsibilities. NRC Conclusion Based on the above , the NRC conc l uded that vehic l es were leaving RCAs according to procedure. Concern 5: You asserted that licensed activities were being performed past 4 pm and that there may not have been an Authorized User present to oversee this decommissioning work on January 12 , 2011. NRC Assessment The inspector questioned personnel regarding after hours work act i vities. The inspector was told that this usually involves non-licensed work areas and is not a frequent occurrence. In addition, personnel were aware that an Authorized User is required to be onsite for any work after hours , and I n addition , the RSO representative is on hand. 2 ENCL0SURE1 Rl-2011-A-0019 NRC Conclusion Based on the above, the NRC concluded that licensee personnel understood the requirements for licensed work conducted after hours. Concern 6: You asserted that the perimeter fence appeared breached and would not have been able to limit or control access. NRC Assessment The inspector noted that the area is large and borders a residential neighborhood. The RSO representative does, at a minimum, a daily fence integrity check. Breaches that have qeen observed are repaired that day. The inspector did not observe any breaches in the perimeter fence during the course of the inspection. NRC Conclusion Based on the above, the NRC confirmed that there have been breaches in the perimeter fence, but the NRC was unable to identify any improprieties or inadequacies associated with regulated activities. The licensee appears to act in a timely fashion to assess and rep.air any breaches in the perimeter fence." Concern 7: You asserted that a survey of a locker was not adequate because the interior was not tested. NRC Assessment The inspector confirmed that the locker in question was in an office area. It did not contain any radioactive material. It appears the licensee opened the locker to remove NRC license related documents and secure them in another location. No wipe test was required. NRC Conclusion Based on the above , the NRC concluded that a survey of the locker in question was not required. Concern 8: You asserted that required radiation safety records may be compromised and/or destroyed beeause the records, which had been kept under lock and key in the site RSO's office as of January 23, 2011, were accessible due to the locks having been broken and/or removed. 3 ENCLOSURE 1 Rl-2011-A-0019 NRC Assessment The inspector was provided all required radiation safety records that that were requested. The inspector determined that the records were secured with the appropriate level of control and access. NRC Conclusion Based.on the above, the NRC concluded that required radiation records were properly stored and controlled. Concern 9: You asserted that the emergency/off-hours contact list conta i ned your t e l ephone number even though you were no longer wo rking at the Hunter's Point Naval Shipyard. NRC Assessment The inspector found that the RCA area signs contained outdated emergency and off hours contact information. This was brought to the attention of the licensee at the exit meeting on March 31, 20 11. All of the signs were corrected with ti e correct contact information by April 4, 2011, per an email from the licensee*~ (b)(?)(C) .NRC Conclusion Based on the above , the NRC confirmed that RCA signs contained out dated hours contact information , but we were unable to identify any improprietie s or inadequacies associated with NRC-regulated activities. 4 r" ** ,, 1 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Investigations Region I Field Office Witness Interview Questions Case Number: 2-20l 1):0 52 Case Title: Turkey Point H & I AUeger: Elbert Bowers Employer: Tetra Tech Interviewee: IL..(b-)(7-)(C_) ____ __, Date: Friday F ebruary 7 , 2012 Location: State of Ca1ifornia Office Building 455 Golden Gate Ave. San Francisco, CA 94102 Counsel Present: Tim Murphy, Esq. Start Time: ,9 \S-..QM End Time: , 3 ', VS: £ "-1 1. In what capacity are you currently employed with Tetra -Tech? ['°'" I 3. How J on~ have y ou been emn)aved wirb IT2 ,~ 4. Where were you employed prior to TT? 2-2011-052 TT/ Hunters Point H & I .. 1,' 2 5. Ir, what capacity were you employed with your previous employer? 6. What is your professional background consistent of , what areas have you traditionally worked in? b)(l)(C) , . vv.nat 1s your expenence m me Nuclear Industry o r employment with companies within the industry? r x 7 X C) r fy<* 8. What are your duties and re s ponsibilities under your current role with TT? 9. and or certifications d 10. Have you been trained on , or do you have an awareness of what is considered Nuclear Safety i ssues/concerns? . 0 O t-~" \. I Q:,1..(.-{- C'-(/ o()J U~ ,l.,Jj of' v-J~+ t~ fltQu,rtJ

• 11. Are employees trained and orientated on what i ss ues are considered Nuclear Safety Concerns , if so by whom and how often? \I ,t:::> . L,o,.r-11'

]:)u41-1 2-2011-052 TT/ Hunters Point H & I l (b)(7)(C)

• t ** , 3 12. What mechanism is used whereby employees can raise Nuclear safety concerns ? S?l£.Lk iv Mc-c,...803 or $~~L6d.:$.

'f U ()..r(.., '\lsc

• 8\vt..--~cc.~s.s -Z..1~Sl-c.P5 13. Is training provided regarding the use of the mechanisms for reporting safety issues , (i.e., are employees instructed on how tp write a CR)? 14. What is the TT policy regarding in regards to employees ability raising safety related concerns?

I.\-*ls (Sn.C~vr~. s °'~ i...S 1-c~ 15. Are employees protected from retaliation for raising safety rel ated issues? l:,. 16. Is this outlined in an emp lo yee handbook or procedural guide of sorts?, if so do yo u know where exactly? 'l) , 17. When layoff s occur, how is it de te rmined whlch employees are laid off and which are retained? . \}J l {A-. CA-"-~ 1 ~(._ O'A. Af>* j e.A-5;;..,.,,.; ~;...__......i.....;...;.,_-----'---, b C) L---------------- b p-2-2011*052 n / Hunters Point H & I l (b)(l)(C) .. 4 18. Is it encouraged for employees to report Nuclear Safety Concerns to Management, and what are the mechani sms by which this can be done? 'l i, s 19. How do management personnel at Hunters Point document these notifications by employees? Is it just done on the work site level or is it elevated up the chain to members Of management to Corporate? -:"'\. I

• I\C\ ( J
• s '.i., A or> u tpU°'a --~ O"'--r""1...-<:,.J ~" , "'\ ,-

C,O"',lif I\* :I.. S5 v.(.h ~l ~Co.n-kd, b.J<LS (Pr<-of ~JV'<-dl,(/"t-tl1, 20. Do you Know Mr. Elbert " Bert ,, BOWERS? i~). 21. How d o you know Mr. BOWERS and when did you first have contact with him? ou initially have contact with BOWERS? 22. Under what circumstances did (b)(7)(C) t\-s~ (b)(7): C) -to~ au ~e).~ ())er fV\,6 J"( -23. What kind of employee was BOWERS de scri bed as? 1 _ , r,* "L e..r.t--~Afr"\ 'J-Cl-~ ...Ll'.(/0 lvt.J. CL£ ~{.,, 6 ~J,tJ) ~'( ~: ~1(7XC) 1.5 C,l,\(Y'(.,,-v ~L-(b)-(7)-(C) ___ I* 24. Did you hav e confidence in his abilities as the Radiat ion Safety Officer (RSO)? '/0* ) A-5 IA~ kW-:rLt-.n~uf t?r ~v '{ t) . 25. Did BOWERS raise safety related concerns to you, if so, please provide details? i ~t.6 2011-052 TT/ Hunter s Point H & I l (b)(7)(C) ., s 26. If so, what was done ? J -~.\-w 0-S (;or,{. v-\{_ ' 27. Were you ever advised by other managers at HP that BOWERS raised Safety re lated issues with them, if so who? \\} D 28. Are you aware of the nature of BOWERS safety related iss ues?, particularly if they were Nuclear Safety Issues or Industrial Safety, which would be OSHA? / 29. Who determined that BOWERS would be b.._.t"? --~~* 30. Do you know why BOWERS was Lai~ tiff! 3 1. Can TI employees report safety conce rn s to the NRC ? and is that explained in the training? 2-2011-052 TI/ Hunter s Point H & I l (b)(7)(C) 6 32. Do TI employees have a responsibility to also notify the Navy as it relates to safety related concerns?

33. Was BOWERS retaliated against in any way for rai sing nuclear safety concerns?

tJ 0 34. Did you have any discussions with BOWERS following his layof f? {'J 0 35. Did site management ever identify to you that BOWERS was a trouble maker and was not looked upo~ in a favorable light/. . ( _ µD{-..D ot h~ D l,vblS L~ ~e..t~ Gow'*1; 36. Does TI follow a progressive discipline policy/ Pl ease elaborate

37. How does 1T identify perfonnance concerns to it's employees?

~\.,~l .,) \ + \)4 38. Had BOWERS ever been placed on a PIP or received so me fonn of notice? "5 0 ~vn--2-2011-052 TT I Hunters Point H & I l (b)(7)(C) r" ** 7 39. Had BOWERS ever been s ubject to progressive di sc ipline , if so please elaborate? ~D 40. Where there any other employees who raised safety related concerns who invariably were laid off? !(b)(7)(C) l c:,.,.-J hl..__ WO;:) So~~ L-tb ~.\-:r-0-~0 ~c;. 41. Do you know if an investigation was conducted regarding the issues raised by Mr. BOWERS? 42. Do you believe that BOWERS was discriminated against for raising safety related concerns?

43. Hav e there been problem s on site at HP as it relates to all radiation postings being utilized accordingly? vrL ~rv'C>~..S e.,£. 44. What is the requirement for the conduction of radiation surveys at HP? 45. Are comers being cut as i t relates to the proper conduction of radiation surv e ys? tJ 0 2-2011-052 TI/ Hunters Po i nt H & I l (b)(7)(C)

.. 8 46. Are employees ensuring the safe-keeping of all work related areas of responsibility for TT on site at HP? That is to say, if employees are working in certain zones on site, are they required to lock the equipment and that area up at the conclusion of the day, and is that being done? L~ if'~ lt4X-Jo---L ~""j s "-~* 47. Are audits conducted of your radiation program and by whom, and how often? 48. Was there often pressure placed on the job assignments at TT by the construction management personnel to complete the job, even at the expense of radiation safety? 49. Have you observed or witnessed incidents wherein radiation surveys were not adequately conducted according to procedure? f'..J O t-5 <..At...--Jtc, vJ h r-c.+c '1 \'\JU Gla c...r5 ~f<l,, 50. Does HP operate under the assumption of safety conscious work environment? And are these things stressed? "{ {7) , 51. Did BOWERS develop a reputation as a stickler for radiation safety/protection ? f'..) L?K ~~c""'lwt1

52. If so was that well received amongst the general TT employee base? 2-2011-052 TI/ Hunters Poi n t H & I l (b)(7)(C)

. . . 9 53. Were you privy to any conversations or meetings with TI management regarding BOWERS safety concerns and his vocal nature regarding safety? If so, please elaborate?

54. Have you ever raised any safe~ rf lated issue s during your tenure of employment at HP, if so, please provide details? N i) < 5 5. Were you s ubject to J \ ad;rse action as a result of raising your safety related concern? 56. Do you feel that the Radiation Protection program at HP is sufficient?

vt tJ 57. Are TI employees effectively abiding by the RP program accordingly?

58. How would you respond to the allegation that HP i s a nuclear s ite be i ng run like a construction site? 59. Are there any other employees who might have more intricate knowledge of this situatio~

that you would recommend we talk to? 2-2011-052 n / Hunters Point H & I l (b)(7)(C)

• ..... 1 ,. 10 60. Were you ever instructed by management to not document or write up safety issues raised by employees , and particularly, BOWERS? NO 61. Is*there anything else you would like to add to the record at this time? 2-2011-052 TT/ Hunters Point H & I l (b)(7)(C) 1 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of lnvestiga tions Investigative int e rview Questions Case Numbel': 1-2012-002 Int e rview ee: !(b)(?)(C)

I RSO, Tetra Tec h EC, INC. 1569 Lake Wright Dr. Norfolk, VA Date: May 24, 2012 S tart Time: d: :.).$ End Time:------- I . I-I i '2"' have vo u so l ed as th ~fo r TI? x>n -'t'..J 2. Were vou emoloved wit h 'IT ori or to this cu rrent oo si tion if so in what capacity? (b)(71(C)

3. H~ you been employed with Tf? L_J 4. rior to TI a nd in what ca acity? 5. 6. What ha s our rof ess i onal back ou nd traditiona ll y consis t e d of! tbX lX C J 7. What are (b)(7)(C)

8. Wbat are yo ur officia l req uir eme nt s/ Responsibilities under the l icense? (b)(7)(C)

- r)(>)(C J ' 9. W1 1 at type of tra i nings h ave you received aod w h at type of cert i fications do you ho l d fo r your C are yo u respons i ble for p r ov id i n g trai n i n g t o e mpl oyees in t h e a rea of ,,...RA ,,.,;, D!;'-----. n/safety? {,.S . t l (b)(7)(C) I w"-. , (__ e1)(C) W"V\.P,I ~-1-1 1. I s tbat d o n e i n person and by whom? r)(7)(C) I 12. I low often is t his t rai n ing con d uc t ed? A+Ll45+ A" f\vl-" LL I .. 13. Are a ll employees r eq uir e d t o co m p l ete tra in ing where jn they are o r ientated on w h at n u c l ear safety concerns a r e? t,S, , 14. A r e all emp l oyees tra in ed on h ow to r e p ort safety r e l ated co n cerns? ~e5 l 5. Are emp l oyees gra n ted pr otec ti o n fro m re p risa l if they ra i se safety re l ated co n cerns? 16. If an emp l oyee raises safety re l ated co n cerns, how i s i t doc u me n ted by management , and what is t h e p r ocee d ing process? 0 \ \J> SL I} S I A-viL) /f j 17. H ow are employees supposed to raise safety re l ated concerns? Wha t m ec h anis m s are i n place? Z1P Sl r r.Si s~.pc..rvc.St,r, ~!_h c~v'1 l"JOhC( *. 1 8. I s the procedu r e for r e p o 1 t in g safety co n cerns a n d the fact t h at employees will rece i ve immu n ity/ p ro t ect i o n fr o m r epr i sa l , ca ptur ed in a n e mpl oyee h a n dbook o r proce d u r al m a n ua l? 19. W h en layoffs occ u r h ow is i t d ete rmin e d w hi c h e m ployees a r e laid off and w h ich are reta i ned? 110W 'M,~i B,t,~lt.. )i"D<<A"S ht, t~ve

• 20. Is it e n co u raged for emp l oyees to raise safety r e l ated co n ce rn s t o m anagement, and by what mec h a n ism i s that done? '\ t) ('

K b X'XCJ 3 2 l. H ow do ma nag ement per so nn e.l document these n otificat i ons/ safety co n c ern s raised by s ub or din a t e e mpl oyees? I s it done a t just th e s it e l eve l or is it also ran up th e corporate c hain of command? *}M (l,~ 'i._ CoJ~ 22. Wh e n did ou become acquainted with Bert Bowers and und er what circumstances? (bXJXCt W\...tA. LL C (.l ,..,.. L 1V l+P t-c..Nl UAf s {~ . .u (./ J w °' 5 (Z 5 D t;"' L , le.,,,. f"<-, J-/2. Solt °" J', k., 23. Un der w ha t c ir c um stances did you initially hav e con ta c t with BOWERS? 0 vJ w j LJ t7rk.{) (b)(?)(C) q:'._ft.-M"(J' *) HP. 24. What kind of em plo yee was BOWERS? ~.\--~\6~ I (/4)t.tS "'-~' ~ru l . ,~ Lu&+-'-/'ti< "-( wts.5 Tk-rt._ '-<_ v-)o, .S ~~::3 l "'--\-o \~S _u L,O 1-H-o+t-t....r 5 ..-, .p uv, & (J(LS

• 25. Was BOWERS responsible for trainin g yo u in any way or getting yo u up to spee d when you took ove r? \. -{,)
• 0 !H~ C 'l) d) S d(__ 'f-rc'A / ~/ "' W t tJ-( 26. 1 mse sa e ,+/-;J b:~~ems m yo u , 1t so wn, J
• J _ 'l u , 0 ..... t.,IJut._.

f'A , .-,() r. wa /.<.r c ooL <f..r rtJ "'J w t~}" f>o-.J...., (1 p RC/J -'2-o Io , r>osh ~_,-o tJ 6 27. If yes, what actions did you take upo n ~ce ivin~ the infonnation? t' Jlj l..D (3if-l-to ~GL<f(. I S..Sv'l' j e, ':0oh S4:fc_/u ~':, l 28. Were you eve r a dvi sed by othe r managers at TT , that BOWERS r a i se d safety r e l ated concerns to to tb em? If so whom and when? (00 2 9. Were you aware of the nature of BOWERS safety related concerns? Were d1ey nu c l ear safety or more OSHA r e l ated? fh0t14tt-05/Aa, (su~ ()ol-Lljil-5o.Fc..-fit C0ttc~ 3 0. Ca n TT emp l oyees report safety related co n cerns dire ct l y to th e NRC o r t o RASSO (Dept. of Navy)? / ~s . 31 _ Are emp l oyees re quir ed to first discuss their i ss u es with IT Man agemen t before going to ex tern a l entitites? ND [bX l)(C) 32. When BOWERS worked for you did you write hi s a nnu a l performance ap p ra i sals? r)(J)(C) r. - 4 33. What were his appraisals like? 34. What emploY,ment action was levera~d against BO~EJlS J!..Od wh7?

• 1* \JA \ ~,. 11_ -* f 12,(r~ H,() rn.J WWftP'l<)

, o. At,A-1"\(J) t Cl, * (IVV'--' II LO .J s I-tJ Sl\."!l I (> \. I) i {.. +--f"'\ l e,<A. ~ct,./ 35. Who made the determ(nation to take action against BOWERS? l (b)(7)(C)

\} t,_3 v) \,, ~6. W tr perlonnance issues with BOWERS, leading up to the action taken again~ him #* ... 1 ~37. Was BOWERS advised of the performance issues and was th tation associated \~ ~"* -.1 t h erewith'? N l) . b t,-\-+-U. . l O I O (b)(l)(C)~ LJ (, d h c S \l' *-~-h Bol,f,lt/5 e~ 38. Did site management there at HP ever identify to ~ou thjlt BOWERS was a tr(!uble maker ad was

• not looked upon in a favorable light? t+L--[.A__ .R,..eJ> u. ~f.~ () C-J<-z "'-tJ +n-,. l.:--\ ro 0+1--V .s v f
• N oe,o~"\ ~o. ( A hn> N lt.-ti "'f S .39!~~:RS<l~velop a reputation as a complainer?

' v\ {,,-_.S . OM~lac.N-(J fHJo.-ut "'o+-__s ef'h*'J e, ... c:,..,.6 "-ftS{'-lt-f

40. Had BOWERS ever been placed on a PIP or any other form of progressive discipline?

ND 41. Are you aware of any other emp l oyees there at HP which raised safety concerns and were later laid off? f\J () 42. Do you know if an internal investigation was conducted by TT with respect to the issues BOWERS raised? v{ t_s , 43. What is the requirement for radiation surveys being conducted at HP?

• jh(,l\-Oi.< G,e-s~ c.,J ~t ( bx~ h j RA-~ 44. Do you believe that BOWERS was retaliated against for raising safety re l ated concerns?

No 45. Have there been prob l ems on site at HP regarding postings being utilized accordingly and ' adhered to? 5 0 v'V\oL ~-hr-<.,Ll 6 v. t N b+t, ~j P r-t Ill I""-f-46. Are corners being cut by construction employees and others at HP as it relates to conducting RAD Surveys? Did BOWERS bring this up to you? N () M ~L. a /f'*ft_ C4fu-n,"'<,./s W,;_ !Ju.-~ oJ{.fi'-ll 1 "ot Co """ 5"""vv', 47. Are employees ensuring the safe keeping and operation of a ll equipment and work relat ed materials in what are thought to be RAD Areas? 48. Was there pressure placed on jobs by construct i on personnel to get things done quickly even at the expense of RAD Protection? NO{-p,.-.\-C)l,f).M~-l_... (t {:-(l A-D 49. Did so\v~~eputation *, 'g~k)e':f o'i the rules?, if so how did tha/ ir1pact his interaction with personnel o n site? 1\-\"1~ n) ,9-L-().., S hvki V-6.,-.r-h, tS ~~f(/~°tlfh\, ().f"\. t..v-\l.,,) A 50. Were you privy to any co n versatio n s with TT management regarding BOWERS safety concerns *~~tocae,e~s*~~*f-r t.J<Jl--3 <.,+l-1 '.:) .L, V I ~-51. H ow often did you travel to HP? r x 1x q 52. Are IT Employees ab iding by RAD Prot ect i on guidelines ? -t.S 53. Were you ever instructed by TT management above you to NOT document BOWERS co n cerns w h en he raised them to you/ O 54. Wliy was BOWERS removed from pie HP Site? , "'(W... cv:s v.~* 't\"l N>J .. tt, 55. I s there anything else yo u'd like to add? ,_ f)oc))u 5 L Ue,v, 1 *R t\~lu 'L~ \-o ~. tJrLl---\.\Jas~ '+ Wrt µ ~('\ 'f'J t'\'\, 1\-fJ rs . 8~_5 'bowif..> was l'Jvf,'\I t,,i/w--iJ 5 :i-" ~t\ J 12.1 t tJ C, r lpnOi\ le) ~J fVl {tA-1-1 fJo f , f-w .5 0v--~Pll h,-'"1 0" I~ ~s M (J,, !J()-1.) b ( O'\ {. 1-t_ Sewali K. Patel Regional Investigator U.S. Department of Labor UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON , D.C. 20555-0001 April 21, 2014 Occupational Safety and Health Administration 90 7th Street, Suite 18100 San Francisco, CA 94103

SUBJECT:

REQUEST FOR OFFICE OF I NVESTIGATIONS (01) CLOSED CASES

Dear Ms. Patel:

You recently requested that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission , Office of I nvestigation (OI) provide you with the 01 Reports of Investigat i ons (ROI) and invest i gative exhibits corresponding with the Region I (RI) allegation numbers as follows: Rl-2011-A-0019 (01 Case No. *-2-012.002 } Rl-2011-A-0113 (01 Case No. 1-2012-019) Rl-2012-A-0022 (01 Case No. 1-2012-037) The RI allegation numbers have been comp l eted by 0 1: RI and the ROls and exhibits are enclosed for your review in accordance with the Memora n dum of Understanding between the Nuclear Regu l atory Commission (NRG) and U.S. Department of Labor (DO~). dated September 9 , 1998 , NRC and DOL may share information and records. Also, as a reminder the following caveat warning is applicable to all 01 investigative materials: DO NOT DISSEMINATE, PLACE IN THE PUBLIC DOCUMENT ROOM, OR DISCUSS THE CONTENTS OF THIS REPORT OF INVESTIGATION OUTSIDE NRC WITHOUT AUTHORITY OF THE APPROVING OFFICIAL OF THIS REPORT. UNAUTHORIZED DISCLOSURE MAY RESULT IN ADVERSE ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION AND/OR CRIMINAL PROSECUTION We look forwa r d to working with you on future requests and should you have any questions regarding the documentation provided , please contact me at (301) 415-3486. (b)(7)(C) (b)(7)(C) em Office of Investigations Enclosures

A s Stated PO!. ISSUANCE REVIEW ROUTINt ,LIP CASE NO.: 1-2012-002 (b)(7J(C)

RECEIVED AT Ol:HQ:. _ _.:.:.1/=9/2=0..:..::13(b)(7)(C) DATE: .L...-------l c;,-_p-g OPERATIONS OFFICER REVIEW: ___!:::::::::::""""""1...,..,--i.

• * :Z:7 1CER RECOMMENDATIOtt

__ Copy of Post Issuance Review to Field __ Return to Field for Further Action/Issue Corrected Copy of Report __ Forward to Deputy Director Forward to Director Comments: G: IPOSTRVW_RPT .doc UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION I 2100 RENAISSANCE BLVD. KING OF PRUSSIA, PA 19406-2745 OFFICIAL BUSINESS ,-2-,012 --()O(_ f I C L 0 () o Tc_~ ( 1 U.S. Nuclear Regul.atory Commission Office of Investigations Region I Fie l d Office Witness Interview Questions Case Number: 1-2012-002 Case Tit l e: Alleger: Turkey Point H & I Elbert Bowers Employer: Tetra Tech Interviewee

~,..~-)(7-)(C~)-------------.

Date: Thursday February 9 , 20 1 2 Location: State of Ca l ifornia Office Building 455 Golden Gate Ave. San F rancisc o , CA 94102 Counsel Present: Tim Murphy, Esq. Start Time: :;) \.() ?5-t" End Time: ,3 S"\ \>""l P J f 1. In what capacity are you cun-ently employed with Tetra -Tech? r)(?)(C) 2. How lon h ave you been in your current pos it ion? (b)(l)(C)

3. How long have you been employed with TI? 4. Where were yo u employed prior to TT? r~ 1-2012-002 TT/ Hunters Point H & I l (b)(?)(C)

( 2 5. In what ca p acit y w.ere y ou em pl o ye d with your previous employer? r (l X C) I 6. What i s your profess i ona l background consistent of , what areas have you tradi ti onally Worked in? r XJX C) (1,)(1:(C) 7. What is your experience in the Nuc l ear Ind u stry or employment wi t h companies within the indus~ ... r_,x_c_) _____________________________ ____. 8. What are~"* duties aod resooosibilities 11ader vnnr current rnJe wjth JI? l~" C C ft 9. What type of training ~d or cert1fications do you hold with respect to your current job description? ,Jo fl_A--D tntL~~ ~(µ~ 6~ 0.1 , 10. Have yo u been trained on, ordo you have an awareness of what i s considered Nuclear Safety issues/concerns? 1-2 012-002 TI/ H u nte r s Point H & I l (b)(7)(C) 3 11. Are employees trained and orientated on what issues are considered Nuclear Safety Concerns , if so by whom and how often? '{ l .> . 12. What me~u.u.:.,U.1.J..:...u..:.c.L.l...1,Q,1,,1.i.c; reby employees can raise Nuclear safety concern s ? (b)(7)(C) -,5CA~ (b)(7)(C -Qt ~.s t4'-S [\.p~ -13. Is training provided regarding the use of the mechanisms for reporting safety issues , (i.e., are employees instructed on how to write a CR)? "{ --t...-:> . 14. What is the TI policy regarding i n r:gards to employees ability raising safety related concerns?

15. Are employees protected from retaliation for raising safety related issues? t,j 16. Is this outlined in an employee handbook or procedural guide o f sorts?, if so do you know where exactly? 17. When layoffs occur , how is i1 determined which employees are laid off and whlch are * .,, retained? * (_()(7) _ / 0 e.il;,e,5

~ruf.f-,, l.).f\* o t-1 rH-.>L,-t-lu8o,r ~rt.e.--t.-.-i--w \-\P -C. CY'~(.,.~ rr) ro 0~F-r ,... t ~5L N;,t +-,if\ 1-2012-002 TI/ Hunters Point H & I l (b)(7)(C) ( 4 18. Is it encouraged for employees to report Nuclear Safety Concerns to Management, and what are the mechanisms by which this can be done? 19. How do management pers0IU1el at Hunters Point document these notifications by employees? Is it just done on the work site level or is it elevated up the chain to members of management to corporate? .Y~(:>~c.>-.> O"'-~i~CA.\-to-.. o..b&,-S L , ys V c;l-c) ¥ ~J.l5 / t--K: . 20. Do yo u K no w Mr. E lb ert B e rt" BOWERS? 21. How do you know Mr. BOWERS and when did y ou fir st hav e contact with him? r;x q ~er what circumstances did you initially hav e contact with BOWERS? 23. What kind of emp l oyee was BOWERS described as? ~"'"\<J~.S NQ..c..... L\ C(.,f\b~~ r<<-r oF Jo~. "W)_ \Sv~) '-'~J l,oS,+-~~flt-~+ 0~ ~.t b s~,110c)rS. y, '.)C ~'"' tC.k-ri l, e,e.v--~ l "'5 S\ 'b l~ °'.Ckxo-L ft t,IO WOV-F 24. Did yo u have confidence in his abilities as the Radiation Safety Officer (RSO)? \/l~ 1-2012-002 TI/ Hunters Point H & I l (b)(7)(Cj ( .5 25. Did BOWERS raise safety related concern s to you , if so , please provide details? ND t-J {... D F S u~~c;..,<....., ~e....<+-<bfb"'cJ hk-_r-.s.5U-e S V f ~(oc:,cJ ;:~ SL~ "'-S. RS, particularly , those that led to ---0 v--"\ . .2D \ \

• EI.<' L \. -<..,(t I 27. If so, what was done? (b)(7)(C) iu..\-\JU~\\~ (<.,lStj~
• 28. Did a verbal or physical altercation occur and if so, please outlin~e~th~a!cL-t fi loJo o:.a..c.i..i.

ro~e~?---------. \I V 'b 4A. L ~"' Bu+-_,}. e (7)(C) I . 29. Were you ever advised by other managers at HP that BOWERS raised Safety related issues with them, if so who? 0 . r)(l)(C) I s o--.\--f\ \ 0 t Or -\, AA~ J L \ ,. h \A)\~ ~Cl~t) I t<\.A. f 3 0. Are you aware of the nature of BOWERS safety related issues?, particularly if they were Nuclear Safet y Issues or Industrial Safety , which would be OSHA? 1-2012-002 TI/ Hunters Point H & I r b)(7)(C) ( 6 31. Was Bert somewhat of a tom in your side because he was very active and appeared to notice a number of deficiencies and brought them to your attention regarding the construction personnel, not ope~atinJ appropriately from a RAD perspective? NO* L~ r.,u-+) t.Jf.,VU-LL-f+~*S ~Ct'~ 32. Who determined that BOWERS would be no longer be working at HP ? \)v-\-*1,_0 W~ 1,-c._ ~.e-S\j~~ fFbJe.tl-*

33. Do you know why BOWERS was T1&Mb ed? 34. Did you have a grudge against BOWERS in any wa r NO , w~r l XCl . ~c \>t.,'z>O N. 35. Can TT employees report safety concerns to the NRC? and is that explained in the training?

36. Do TT employees have a responsibility to also notify the Navy as it relates to safety rela t ed concerns?

1-2012-002 TT/ Hunters Point H & I l (b)(?)(C) 7 37. Was BOWERS retaliated against in any way for raising nuclear safety concerns? NV 38. Did you have any discussions with BOWERS following his T111 1ier~ ND* 39. Did site management ever identify to you that BOWERS was a trouble maker and was not looked upon in a favorable* tight? fr -u:._.h L-A 0.11!-1' t,.J O

• rrt-FcA,,-t-Llk. ou+ (j)aS , ' , ~:s ~. ~-U--\-frvc,\c)t.c}

\~ Tivhnl~'-\}t~p""'s-,a,t,htj '-\-,!jO -n 'l"\cr-nt4 ,.-..A.~ 6.5' , {)I' COA ~. COl L( 5 40. Does TT follow a progressive discipline policy/ Please elaborate

41. How does TT identify performance concerns to it's employees?

., ~~v.5,ttl_S. ,\)~~~ w~) pc l,(..ll'Y'~-k-J. f(f5 .--, / .\:)-u'\-'~ (>U-TI.(" M'-"({_

• 42. Had BOWERS ever been p l aced on a PIP or received some form of notice? tJ 0 43. Had BOWERS ever been subject to progressive discipline, i f so please e labo rate? 1-2012-002 TI/ Hunters Poin t H & I l (b)(7)(C)

( 8 44. Where there any other employees who raised safety related concerns who invariably were laid off? NV 45. Do you know if an investigation was conducted re ardin the issues raised b Mr. BOWERS? l (b)(7)(C) I {---(b)(7)(C) ....._ ___________ __. 46. Do you believe that BOWERS was discriminated against for raising safety related concerns?

47. Have there been problems on site at HP as it relates to all radiation postings being utilized accordingly?

48. What is the requirement for the conduction of radiation surveys at HP? -~ cx-c.-wW11 Q1Ac,y--t-Lvzr +-VV\d\~l1's

-..!IAC....0..-y'\,'-~ -t-ou~C>,--__, SL.t.C~s 49. Ase comers being cut as it relates to the proper conduction of radiation surveys? fv D SO. Are employees ensuring the safe-keeping of all work related areas of responsibility for TT on s i te at HP? That is to say, if employees are working in certain zones on site , are they required to lock tbe equipment and that area up at the conclusion of the day, and is that being done? 1-2012-002 n / Hunters Point H & t l (b)(7)(C) ( 9 51. Are audits conducted of your radiation program and by whom, and how often? ~l,~. Cor~~ Psts*o bolb RC\~ 0 , ,0 RC.

• 52. Was there often pressure placed on the job assignments at TT by the construction management personnel to complete the job, even at the expense of radiation safety? 53. Have you observed or witnessed incidents wherein radiation surveys were not adequately conducted according to proce~ure?

-1\) U 54. Does HP operate under the assumption of safety conscious work environment? And are these things stressed?

55. Did BOWERS develop a reputation as a stickler for radiation safety/protection?

56. If so was that well received amongst the general TT employee base? \~-e...r~

wou\ J. V,~-\-S 0""' I L. .... j ..S b~Slde_ 0~ vv.t

• 57. Were you privy to any conversations or meetings with TT management regarding BOWERS safety concerns and his vocal nature regarding safety? If so, please elaborate?

5 '<-0.. \. \ c) \)U'\) l tMJ . 1-2012-002 TI/ Hunters Point H & I l (b)(7)(C) 10 58. Have you ever raised any safety related issues during your tenure of employment at HP , i f so , please provide details? l.-\_ ~) .. 59. Were you subject to any adverse action as a re s ult ofraising your safety related concern? rvo 60. Do you feel that the Radiation Protection program at HP is sufficient? ~/v5> 61. Are TT employees effectively abiding by the RP program accordingly?

62. How would you respond to the allegation that HPjs a nuclear s ite being run l i ke a construction site? R ;--c~~t-,w;ha-A fJ-ltp h) tAo--k L II\ uric.~-{ONL-:Uots~ 't-~-P ~l)~ 6 3. Wer e you ever i nstructed by manag e ment to not docwnent or write up safety issues raised b y empl o yees , and particularly , BOWERS? No 64. I s there anything else you would lik e to add to the r e c or d at thi s time? 1-2012-002 TI/ Hunters Point H & I !(b)(7)(C)

( 11 65. Did Bert BOWERS engage in protected activi t y by raising safety related concerns and was ultimately puni s hed by the company for it? 1-2012-002 TI/ Hunters Point H & I l (b)(7)(C) I ,t . ( ( 1 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Investigations Region I Field Offic.e Witness Interview Questions Case Number: 2-2011-052 Case Title: Turkey Point H & I Alleger: Elbert Bowers Employer: Tetra Tech Interviewee: !,__(b_)(7_)(C_) __ ___. Date: Friday February 7 , 2012 Location: State of Ca lifornia Office Buildin g 455 Go]den Gate Ave. San Francisco, CA 94102 Counse l Present: Tim Murphy , Esq. 1. In what capacity are yo u currently employed with Tetra Tech? L*° I 2. H ow lon have ou been in our current osition? )(Cl 3. How lon h ave ou been em lo e d with TT? b)()X C J 4. Where were vo u em nloved nrior to TT? (bXJXC) 2-2011-052 TI/ Hunters Point H & I l (b)(l)(C) ( 2 5. In what capacity were yo u employed with your previous employer?

6. What is your professional background consistent of, what areas have you traditionally worked in? -----7. What i s your expe ri e nce in the Nuclear Industry or employment with companies within the indu stry? \b',<.7X C> 8. What are y o'¥ duties and responsibilities under your current role with TT? (b)(7i(C) 9. What typ e of training and or certifications do you hold with respect to your current job descriptio1:

D:J 1 -fv O GV-\-' S 10. Were y ou responsib l e for any oversight, inspection or even visit ac tivities there onsit e at iitiP? 11. Have you been trained on, o r do you hav e an awareness of what is considered Nuclear Safety issues/concerns? . ~0--""" \.\,.l w-W t¥-. 1 o 20 2-2011-052 TT/ Hunters Point H & I

12. Are employees trained an d o rientated on what issues are considered Nuclear Safety Co ncern s, if so by whom and how oft en? 'Y CS . 13. What mechanism is u se d whereby e!Ilployees can raise safety concerns? e.A-<-, M ~o +o o~ C--v"'\.r104,u-&, , {2-~"-\-.5 c:,..~ht_

~~SvG-S ,

• 14. l s tr ai nin g pro v id ed regarding the u se of the mechanism s for reporting safety i ssues, (i.e., are employees instructed on how to write a CR)? l . Su..~ M~ {......( C:(µ"\ fl..~ ~OC-<.,, (.'"'r,,u...+-So~ t<r-Urt().

g"'\&~

• l:, cf--~ ~l Hvt..vuu-; " So.~ .J:. s ..s"' ...e-5 er<... v U 60 lt,..u;1 15. What i s the TT policy r egarding Whistle-blowing in regard s to employees ability raising safety re l ated concerns? *3: .\-'~ & cc, e.J +o tc-v*5 L S O ft-~ C<Y'u.,,r""':r 0--..J ~r o~~. 16. Aie employees protected from retal iat ion for rai sing safety related issues? 17. Is this outlined in an employee h an dbo ok or procedural guide of sorts?, if s o do you know where exactly? 13l\,1:, (, c.i{,~ S 0 iu-o ~(.,l~~ ...
• t\"'t.t. -l,D Sl11>$ 18. When l ayoffs occur , h ow i s it de t ermined whicil employees are laid off and which are retained? (!,~ .fst)(,k, ::l-1'"\ r~<~j 2-2011-052 TI/ Hunters Point H & I l (b)(7)(C) 4 19. Is it encouraged for emp loyees to report Nuclear Safety Concerns to Management , and what are the mechanisms by which this can be done? 20. How do managemen t personnel at Hunters Point document these notifications by employees?

Is it just done on the work site level or is it elevated up the c hain to members of management to corpo rate? / 21. Do you Know Mr. El bert " Bert" BOWERS? q ~) ' .. 22. How do you know Mr. BOW ERS and when did you first hav e contact with him? \i~ w"-vi. h~/ e l)(C) I hj,~ lt*w'"-iowus If'-\(Av,~wtd \,-,.,~I 23. U nder what circum s tances did you initially have contact with BOWERS? / 24. What kind of employee was BOWERS described as? 0 {.( f}-f*t\~;, :J~

• l.1 LAJe,t.S ~v-<1 ~f ~+-Fl--\-v?) fv\()-+, * ~_j °'6(1 \-\ R-\ 5u -l <;. 25. Did you have confidence in bi s abilities as the Radiation Safety Officer (RSO)? ~~t!.....

-?, 0 J:> 1-b" +~ l)) c.,.J 00 0~ {)/'i -LA -J..<-c__ 'f,i t.Al) fV"ol LfLc.O tO lll'}'C&t ({_D 2-2011-052 TI/ Hunters Point H & I l (b)(7)(C) 5 26. Did BOWERS raise safety related concerns to you, if so, please provide details? yt:;-\3ou.Jvs R.cu<;;J f,<{_ ~ck-~ w~s (N~L~ (\-r:W *~ove-5 \))1.}<.. fJ() f-t? 'J A-vet~L Tk CL/tl.C(__ lAJ05 £)£-f"aW so~ ~_s f'V violct-.-hO'\

• 27. If so, what was done ? 28. Were you ever advised by other managers at HP that BOWERS raised Safoty related issues wi°th them, if so who? 29. Are you aware of the nature of BOW ERS safety related issues?, particularly if they were Nuclear Safety Issues or Industrial Safety, which would be OSHA? tJ Ot--~Cift....

30. Who determined that BOWERS would be Laid ,.:: o:.:: ff;..,;?:..------------, pt> w<r ..s WO:.::S ~&tt{T*<.c) , L-r_(?)-(C) _________

_ 3 1. Do you know why BOWERS was L!t!e e \-\ L ~.b .])\Sr>~ w ( (b)(?)(C) L-----------------

32. Can TT employee s report safety concerns to the NRC ? and is that explained in the training? -{, ,S . .I..-,{--l S p OS lc...J, 2-2011-052 TT/ Hunters Po i nt H & I l (b)(7)(C)

( 6 33. Do TT employees have a responsibility to also notify the Navy as it relates to safety related concerns? 34. Was BOWERS retaliated against in any way for raising nucle ar safety concerns? NO 35. Did you have any discussions with BOWERS following his~cgff.2

36. Did site management ever identify t o you that BOWERS was a trouble maker and was not looked upon in a favorable light/ a 37. Doe s IT fo ll ow a progressive discipline policy/ Please elaborate

µ 0\--J vr< 38. How doe s IT identify performance concerns to it's emp l oyees? "-\-t~ \... E" o l""'+t "" ,. 39. Had BOWERS eve r been placed o n a PIP or received some fonn of notice? \JU~ 2-2011-052 TI/ Hunters Point H & I l (b)(7)(C) ( 7 40. Had BOWERS ever been subject to progressive discipline, if so please elaborate? ~(A--~<<i-41. Where there any other employees who raised safety related concerns who invariably were laid off? y.1>o you know if an investigation was conducteq regarding the issues raised by Mr. BOWERS? 43. Do you believe that BOWERS W8$ discriminated against for raising safety related concerns? 44. Have there been problems on site at HP a s it relates to all radiation postings being utilized accordingly?

45. What is the requirement for the conduction of radiation surveys at HP? E~l~-u_s po..s-r~'"':)S w ~, &.r\--~ Corrtc+-~. f.,{,~t1 vB (ll.:f--atl"VS

46. Are corners being cut as it relates to the proper conduction of radiation surveys? ,WC N u Cur N...r5 6u '1. ~+* ~GU ~S ~u-l,\~SL ~/'L fc> SLArcl~ w vJ(t,t 2-2011-052 TI/ Hunters Point H & I 8 4 7. Are employees ensuring the safe-keeping of all work related areas of responsibility for IT on site at HP? That is to say, if employees are working in certa in zones on s i te, are they required to Jock the equipment and that area up at the conclusion of the day, and is that being done? for f-t-{__ MO .)"\--~+-\}{,.,) . 48. Are audits conducted o f your radiation program and by whom, and how often? C.,o~ur;t-<-

f<-b o t ~~CL<:.., I\J ""1 \\.1:A-~ t9 v)~ .s~ ~O\-\--49. Was there often press ure plac ed on the j o b ass ignm ents at TT by the construction management personnel to comp l ete the job, eve n at the expense of radiation safety? ~1) ~ave you observed or witnessed incidents wherein radiation surveys were not adeq uatel y conducted accordi n g l o procedure?

51. Doe s HP operate under the assumption of safety conscious work en viro nment? And are the se things stressed?

'\J\ 'v~ 52. Did BOW ERS deve l op a reputation as a s tickler for radiation safety/protect i on? rJ 0 53. If s o was that well r eceive d amongst the general TI employee base? 2-2011-052 TI/ Hunters Point H & I l (b)(7)(C) ( 9 54. Were yo u privy to any conversations or meetings with TT management regarding BOWERS sa fety Jn 0 rn s and his vocal nature regarding safety? If so , please elaborate?

55. Have you ever rais e d any safety related issues during your te nure of employment at HP , if so, pl ease pro v id e details? \J) {,. 5 , 56. Were you subject t o any adverse action as a result of raising your safety related concern? 57. Do you feel that the Radiation Protection program at HP is sufficient?

58. Are TT emp loy ees effec tively abiding by the RP program accordingly?

59. How would you re s pond to the allegation that HP i s a nuclear site being run like a construction s ite? 60. Are ther e any oth e r emp lo yees who might have more intricate .knowledge of this situation, that you would recommend we talk to? 61. Were you e v e r in st ru c ted by management to not document or write up safety issues raised by empl oyees, and particularly , BOWERS? (\) 2-2011-052 TI/ Hunters Point H & I l (b)(7)(C) 10 62. Is ther e anything e l se y ou would like to add to the record at this time? (_6 .. wh~+ .:p () \/ Ol.l kncJ"w. M Ovt--t-Pr-ri :I .SJ" ve.. f..-f:p (~ ' ~(}~ ' om te_ u)~u,.; l)o cu.~+5 ri?)~ V'-.J oF-F--<, ce WV{., .fj/10l<}

p ~W{. ( 1',J_jL " &4* Do i ov1. kt ArJ v,,..Ju-&t,..J i"5 or=-?,o...iu-5 AS\<. J -12) g~ {~()o/{ el Ll te.,""S(_ ,J o+-f!svv o-re._ . 2-2011-052 TI/ Hunters Point H & I l (b)(7)(C) ( 1 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Investigations Region I Field Office Witness Interview Questions Case Number: 1-2012-002 Case Title: Turkey Point H & I Alleger: Elbert Bowers Employer: Tetra Tech Interviewee: !(b)(l)(C) I Date: Thursday February 9, 2012 Location: State of California Office Building 455 Golden Gate Ave. San Francisco, CA 94102 Counsel Present: Tim Murphy, Esq. Start Time: --------End Time: S , 6 I P M -{->Gt-1. ln what capacity arc you currently emp loyed with Tetra -Tech? r)(7)(C) 2. How long have you been in your c urrent position? e JXC) I 3. How looo bave vau been erouJ a ved wjth II2 r@Q 4. Where were you employed prior to TT? r~, 1-2012-002 TI/ Hunters Point H & I l3ov-J"° ':_ I f t,ovtzS ( l (b)(7)(C) 2 5. In what capacity were you employed with your previou s employer? 6. What is your professional background consistent of , what areas have you t r aditionally worked in? 10" 1 ,l(c) 7. What is your experience in the Nuclear Industry or employment with companies within the industry? [""' ------------------------...J

8. What are your duties and responsibilities under your current role with TT? (b)(7)(C) 9. What type of training and or certifications do you hold with r espect to your current job de s cription?

I 0. Have you be e n trained on , or do you have an awareness of what is considered Nuclear Safety issue s/concerns? J) _Q V\ 1-2012-002 IT/ Hunters Point H & I ( 3 11. Are employees trained and orientated on what issues are considered Nuclear Safety Concerns, ifso by whom and how often? 'v\, ..e..,~. ~"V.c.t. L ~o_o, o\.olJ lcc. l (.}__ e.H"'{6k.r; .. (b)(7)(C} 12. What mechanism is used whereby employees can raise Nuclear safety concerns? O .\-o ':>4.P<<-V ,,s l) J'~ 1 \~ \-\o\-ll ""<.., rJ (le_ *1.,.l)L,b -. r I , -1,(\ (,\ J. v-A-2-I s Lt e.s frlr""i f U< 13. Is training provided regardi ng the use of the mechanisms for reporting safety issues, (i.e., are employees instructed on how to write a CR)? {,. ( . 14. What is the TI policy in regards to an employees' ability raising safety related concerns?

15. Are employees protected from retaliation for raising safety related issues? 16. Is this outlined in an employee handbook or procedural guide of sorts?, if so do you know where exactly? 17. When layoffs occur, how is it det e rmined which employees are l aid off and which are retained? -, f\-fV' -\ J... ll"'~u+ '5. LS(f(""' f,. .e&PQ'\.Si-6 (b)(7)(C) _ (b)(7)(C) u)cr\: ~-+~ro-r~s (b)(l)(C)

'"'° fl~ ,b lth'( ._______. fV'\~ C{ J)et-0,lY\. 1-2012-002 TT/ Hunt ers Point H & I l (bl (l l(CI 4 18. Is it encouraged for employees to report Nuclear Safety Concerns to Management, and what are the mechanisms by which this can be done? 19. How do management p ersonne l at Hunters Point document these notifications by employees? Is it just done on the work site level or is it elevated up the chain to members f ? , O managementtocorporat~. u~~J O"'-.\--4_ Su-t.tn.AS~S C <.Y""P \cA.-v-... 20. Do you Know Mr. Elbert Bert" BOWERS? 21. How do you know Mr. BOWERS and when did you first have contact with him? ['° 22. Under what circumstances did you initially have contact with BOWERS? . \) l 5 lt--e.-J-\-W ~L-H ... :j 4\-,Pf2>6t.u- ~e,J' w ,: B l).)a_) N WT/ Ri5o

• 23. What kind of emp loyee was BOWERS described as? A:, :!:--<"* "'-i ~L'--v\ -v Vl;1 t 9 ot> J.
• 8 OvW:S :) .,,.;. @ W~i~ 16 'i /J!.L 24. Did you h ave confidence in his abilities as the Radiation Safety Officer (RSO), ,.:.? _____ _, \vl-\) G) Up W) tc +"4-. pot.~ ~* ~{_ t-(b)(?)(C)

~ck,J CW"\ ~~h()M-z~. L------1 1-2012-002 TI/ Hunter s Point H & I l (b)(7)(C) 5 25. Did BOWERS raise s afety related concern s to you, if so, please provide details? 1'J o . ~-e_,, (b)(7)(C) v~ s 1.+ 5 l k.. E 4 .. J -:, (V'. t,-.vl.~ . {::> c.7v-1-v:$ (\,'t,~ fvl l.n f,en.t!.d 26. Please tell me about the iss u e s raised t o y ou b y BOWERS , particularly , those that led to ri (7)(C) I ' the argument between he and the

• Date, time , , etc? 27. If so, what was done ? 28. Did a verbal or physical altercation occur and if so , please outline that for me? ,.r {J-~ L-29. Were you ever advised by other managers at HP that BOWERS raised Safety related issues with them, if so who? NO 30. Are you aware of the nature of BOWERS safety related issues?, particularly if they were Nuclear Safety Issues or Industrial Safety , which would be OSHA? 1-2012-002 n / Hunters Point H & I l (b)(7)(C) 6 31. Who detennined that BOWERS would be no longer be working at HP ? l (b)(~(C) I 32. Do you know why BOWERS was Ttansferred

? 33. Did you have a grudge against BOWERS in any way?. r',.J Vvt.) f>tu.J </lli.., 34. Can TT employees report safety concerns to the NRC ? and is that explained in the training?

35. Do TT employees have a responsibility to also notify the Navy as it relates to safety related concerns?

36. Was BOWERS retaliated again st in any way for raising nuclear safety concerns?

ND 1-2012-002 TT/ Hunters Point H & I r b)(7)(C) 7 37. Did you have any discussions with BOWERS following h i s 1'Mt§ft!1? 1 uJ<-t--~'tjh N<tc (\'\u-J.1'l-~ ~""' s ,*, 38. Did site management ever identify to you that BOWERS was a trouble maker and was not looked upon in a favorable light? o\:-t_ (.() CL 5 Ol k \!'Y'O-kl-<', Su t-L0u-.:> Lovld-J c.t +-L,{.'l ?uvo-r& l '1 . 39. Does TI follow a progressive discipline policy/ Please elaborate ' _ l i)tP-tr-DS ()('\ ~-{k_+. to r'Y _s UI"\ Ov'f.4'U U , 40. How does IT identify performance concerns to it's employees? ~J '~S O\'\ L ~Sv-l-. 41. Had BOWERS ever been placed on a PIP or received some form of notice? 100 42. Had BOWERS ever been subject to progressive discipline, if so please elaborate?

43. Wh e re there any other employees who raised safety related concerns who invariably were laid off? 1*2012-002 TI/ Hunters Po i nt H & I l (b}(7)(C)

( 8 44. Do you know if an investigation was conducted regarding the issues raised by Mr. 80\VERS? 45. What was the extent of the investigation ? ., f">f{A)'u~li GU\J\l>'vu-1( 46. Do you believe that BOWERS was discriminated against for raising safety related concerns?

47. Have there been problems on site at HP as it relates to all radiation postings being utilized accordingly?

48. What is the requirement for the conduction ofradiation s urveys at HP? 49. Are comers being cut as it relates to the proper conduction of radiation surveys? 50. Are audits conducted of your radiation program and by whom, and how often? Q L (b)(?)(C)

I I AJ R_ c__ /ltA So I 1-2012-002 TI/ Hunters Point H & I l (b)(?j(C) { ( 9 51. Was there often.pressure placed on the job ;:issignments at TT by the construction management personnel to complete the job, even at the expense of radiation safety? 0o 52. Does HP operate under the assumption of safety conscious work environment? And are these things stressed?

53. Did BOWERS develop a reputation as a stickler for radiation safety/protection?

R e.-r v...l.v.-\iCv"\. o..~ A-o h.ck.'-c.r fo.r lcA.D fvp~K-54. If so was that well received amongst th e general IT employee base? \00\-Su<L, 55. What was discussed regarding in management meetings regarding Bert's safety issues and his subsequent employment , following his verbal resigna t ion? ._ 0\ ~\." 6\.~5 ~-\-Ou f--~, (b)(7)(C) ~O l +---~tt...()"fV~ ,L-D * .S vtPDc;i.f..e.p

56. What is TI policy on receipt of verbal resignations from employees? , 57. Have you ever raised any safety related issues during your tenure of employment at HP , if so , please provide details? TI/ Hunters Point H & I l (b)(7)(C)

. . 10 58. Were you subject to any adverse action as a result of raising your safety related concern? 59. Do you feel that the Radiation Protection program at HP is sufficien t? 5'te, c (th+-* 60. Are TT employees effectively a biding by the RP program accordingly?

61. How would you respond to the allegation that HP is a nuclear s ite being run like a construction site? \.\--l w O u ( n 116 L S 14 "9 n ,SvJ" f\) C. 5evd ,JD , 62. Were you ever instructed by management to not document or write up safety issues raised by employees, and particularly, BOWERS? 63. Is there anything else you would like to add to the record at this time? 64. Did Bert BOWERS engage in protected activity by raising saf ety related concerns and w as ultimately puni shed by the company for it? 1*2012*, 002 TI/ Hunters Point H & I l (b)(7)(C)

,.. . . . 11 65. Talk to me about the '4ly that you all went through BOWERS' old office? .66. What was the purpose or rationale?

67. What is the companies legal obligation if any regarding his things, and any expectation of privacy in his work space? 68. What items were found in his office and subsequently shreaded?

\.) W vJ o"'\c.k ~t.c.cr~S RA-\,) TtG<.!j f {rsv-o-l Rt. L,o,rJ.. . 69. Why weren't the performance concerns with Bert Documented? No~~ v..rl-TI/ Hunters Point H & I l (b)(7)(C) ' . 1 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Investigations Region I Field Office Witness Interview Questions Case Number: 2-2011-052 Case Title: Turkey Point H & I Aneger: Elbert Bowers Employer: Tetra Tech Interviewee: l (b)(?)(C) j Date: Wednesday February 8 , 20 1 2 Location: State of California Office Building

• 455 Golden Ga1e Ave. San Francisco , CA 94102 Counsel Present: Tim Murphy~ E~q. Start Time: \'*I O p~ .St End Time: ' --l\) QW'\. PS t' 1. In what capacity are you currently employed with Tetra -Tech? l (b)(7)(C) 2. How long have you been in your current position? r~* I 3. How lon g have you been employed with TT? C 4. Where were you employed prior to IT? r m 2-2011-052 TT/ Hunters Point H & I l (b)(?)(C)

( 2 5. In what ca acity were you employed with your previous employer? )r,)(C) 6. 1s your pro ess1ona cons1s en o , w at areas have you traditionally worked in?r """" x 7"" xc: """) ___________________ _., r;....._ __ __, 7. %at is your experience in the Nuclear I ndustry or employment with companies within the industry? ... r_j/_c_) -------------------------.....1

8. What are your duties and responsibilities under your current role with TT? 1 1e ,11 11c1 I 9. What type of training and or certifications do you hold with respect to your current job description?

l b)(l)(C) 10. Have you be'en trained on, or do you have an awareness of what is considered Nuclear Safety issues/concerns? (,)

• I :) , I<-. te,,i l J w J<J\:f) T'rU l" h. j . 2-2011-052 TI/ Hunters Point H & I l (b)(7)(C)

( 3 11. Are employees trained and orientated on what issues are considered Nuc lear Safety Concerns, if so by whom and how often? "--l_.> . 12. What mechanism is used whereby employees can raise Nuclear safety concerns? Th\~<rO S~Sor-. ~\So haj ~5Lt<A5 13. Is training provided regarding the use of the mechanisms for reporting safety issues, (i.e., are employees instructed on how to write a CR)? 1 t,,S 14. What is the TI policy regarding in regards to employees ability raising safety related concerns?

15. Are employees protected from retaliation for raising safety related issues? 16. Is this outlined in an employee handbook or procedural guide of sorts?, if so do you know where exactly? 17. When layoffa occur, how is it determined which employees are laid off and which are retained?

2-2011-052 TT/ Hunters Point H & I l (b)(7)(C) ( 4 18. Is it encouraged for employees to report Nuclear Safety Concerns to Management, and what are the mechanisms by which this can be done? 19. How do management personnel at Hunters Point document these notifications by employees? Is it just done on the work site level or is it e levated up the chain to members of management to corporate? DJ) ev _ , c --" ---u-..> o""" , ssl>-(_. s\~pl(_ .z:. srv-L: 0-rl... co--rt.e.,k.J. L~c. ,d-d-~ on S .. +( -20. Do you Know Mr. E lbert " Bert" BOWERS?* 21.r~: , w do you know Mr. BOWERS and when did you frrst hav e contact with him? 22. Under what circumstance s did you initially hav e contact with BOWERS? 23. What kind of employee was BOWERS de sc ribed as? l--.)t)\-~oc-'"hC-u.~\,'\ ~"'vc)\,vl.d' j)\!JI"\ '+ l,tcwL OftcCl. 24. Did you have confidence in hi s abilities a s the Radiation Safety Officer (RSO)? ld D ("\ ' + \u._~ L CA._ C,~ l ckt,c.r(._ O+-w l.o +-e,v' _o.S ..LJ ll'I c) c) l \I , l,--. fo.s, k °' * )~ &.,+1-t,.r ie..,e,t .Ji"'ylH1 vJ c~ 2-2011-052 TI/ Hunters Point H & I (b)(7)(C) ( 5 25. Did BOWERS raise safety related concerns to you, if so, please provide details? E\) ~P.rv\ S """'°' \.l 6-tu~, 26. If so, what was done ? LDJJ-t-0 :{,A" ~c.x--~u~~ Lo5 , 27. Were you ever advised by other managers at HP that BOWERS raised Safety related issues with them, if so who? ('Jo 28. Are you aware of the nature of BOWERS safety related issues?, particularly if they were Nuclear Safety Issues or Industrial Safety , which would b.,., e:,,:: O~S_HA_? ______ ____, ,?>tr--r-Mwo"'**\'~ ~+-tv [ ___ '0)(-C) ____ ___. 29. As the safety , did you have a lot ofinteraction with Bert regarding the nature of bis complaints/i s sues? JO. Did you find him to be active in the area of QA/QC in that he wanted to continuously ensure that his he was in compliance and that employee s were operating in a safe capacity from a radiation perspectiv e? 3-Majl ~0.\--, Su+ e:, v+-'f') {,,vif llri (9fYtGf_ . 31. Who determined that BOWERS would be l.aid=e'ff? , L \,-v~ £A-@M+. l (b)(7)(C) I or L-1 (:i)_(?)_(cJ ______ ...J!-fv h~l'---, ..... (b ,....)(7-)(C_) __ _ TT/ Hunters Po i nt H & I 2-2011-052 6 32. Do you know why BOWERS wasJ.aid tJf'f? -t\ 6-h.J " ~" u-\--=*" 0 t\.A L'\) R..-0 C<Oi-: Pr--rb ~v---t'" (b)(7)(C) 33. Can TT employees report safety concerns to the NRC? and is that explained in the training? 34. Do TI employees have a responsibility to also notify the Navy as it relates to safety related concerns?

35. Was BOWERS retaliated against in any way for rais"ing nuclear safety concerns?

µo 36. Did you have any discussions with BOWERS following his la!*gfF. (\J() 37. Did site management ever identify to you that BOWERS was a trouble maker and was not looked upon in a :favorable light? l) 2-2011-052 TT/ Hunters Point H & I l (b)(l)(C) ( 7 38. Does IT follow a progressive discipline policy/ Please elaborate "l t--5 . 39. How does IT identify perfonnance concerns to it's employees? Sf>e.a~l~ ~(~Lt<<-40. H a d BOWERS ever been placed on a PIP or received some form of notice? N o \-SL.JC -41. Had BOWERS ever been s ubject to progres s ive discipline , if so ple~e e l aborat , e? µ0-\-5~. 42. Where there any other employees who raised safety related concerns who invariably we r e laid off? 43. Do you know if an investigation was conducted regarding the issues raised by Mr. BOWERS? Be, \.., L (., \I L-.SO* l (b)(l)(C) 0..t..S.-1-,"' , J 1-\t.< 44. Do you believe that BOWERS was discriminated again s t for raising safety related concerns? 2-2011-052 TI/ Hu nters Point H & I r)(7)(C) ( 8 45. Have there been problems on site at HP as it relates to all.radiation postings being utilized accordingly? \'\, P\ c.,al . \ . _ w h.t e,t,.{-Lr

46. What is the requirement for the conduction of radiation surveys at HP? -L ("\ t O~llf'~ -Ol)..~o, -~c... CX'\~ \).) &-,..~Loq u.,_s l,,taJL W~ C/'f'll/,\_.*

-Q\..l~\"\ ~wll> uS 4 7. Are comers fieing cut as it relates to the proper conduction of radiation surveys? 48. Are employees ensuring the safe-keeping of all work related areas of responsibility for TT on site at HP? That is to say, if employees are working in certain zones on site, are they required to lock the equipment and that area up at the conclusion of the day, and is that being done? 49. Are audits conducted of your radiation program and by whom, and how often? 'i 0 . fJ fL L lvvs .L,.t'\. -}4_

• f> e1v, +--* 50. Was there often pressure placed on the job assignments at TT by the construction management personnel to complete the job, even at the expense of radiation safety? 51. Have you observed or witnessed incidents wherein radiation surveys were not adequately conducted according to procedure? 2-2011-052 Tr/ Hunters Point H & I l (b)(7)(C)

( ( 9 52. Does HP operate under the assumpt ion of safety conscious work environment? And are these things stressed?

53. Did BOWERS develop a reputation as a stickler for radiation safety/protection~, 1 r<l,gq3~ "'0 i--" lk ~Y) y .s:.-n'\/o l l/~ -e,,.n~ 54. If so was that well received amongst the general IT employee base? 55. Were you privy to any conversat ions or meetings with IT management regarding BOWERS safety concerns and his vocal nature regarding safety? If so, please elaborate?

56. Have you ever raised any safety related issues during your tenure of employment at HP, if so, please provide details? '1,e,,) , 57. Were you subject to any adverse action as a result of raising your safety related concern? 58. Do you feel that the Radiation Protection program at HP is sufficient?

2-2011-052 TT/ Hunters Point H & I l (b)(7)(C) ( 10 59. Are TT employees effectively abiding by the RP program accordingly?

60. How would you respond to the allegation that HP is a nuclear site being run like a construction site? 61. Were you ever instructed by management to not document or write up safety issues raised by employees , and particularly , BOWERS?* 62. ls there anything else you would like to add to the record at this time? 2-2011-052 TI/ Hunters Point H & I l (b)(7)(C) u.S o.kl ~N..-w S rL* 1-w, 1~~.....i........:

S~~::.:=* ::..........:::..::.:..:.l.l~~J.L.J..._....J.. _.,.-....::;.,~* Ted -( 0 ' t=:)c..{)U l e,.,-..£L.-v Ll "'5 b c, t'<',\ ~-\-o tJ l) G DJNfA.;; e,+c,. L 't,<rS ~s SL. <lv>>l<>r 0;i' vJ t-Jt.J WMJ G_u..,,,L,{).OO~ (b)(7)(C) ,L~p0r-+s ( 7 CJ (b)(7)(C) ,,.... r)l l)(C) I e,0o.~ A l&D L e...+ 3 0. J l.Pt, o,-.,,-s :=n o , ':"J . 5<AJ~ s / ~o-;"'6 f-pvC 1 t<t tOO'L ~-frd-~(}6 v, l)J-\=:J-. 5?~ LP '-I 6 . U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Investigations Region I Field Office Case Number: 1-2012-002 Case Type: H & I Case Agent: S/A (b)(?)(C) Facility/Site: Hunters Point Naval Shipyard D ecommissioning Project Interviewee: !(b)(7)(C) I Date: November 1 , 2011 Witness Interview Questions Background

1. Are you currently employed, if so by whom? 2. In what capacity / title are you currently employed? . r)(I XC) 3. How long have you been with your current emplo~fer?

._ _____ _. 4. Have you held any other positions other than the a b ove identified with your current employer? pJ D 5. What are vm1c duties aoci cesoonsibiiities under your cucreot oositjnn? l (b)(7)(C) 6. Whom were you employed with prior t o your curre nt employer?

7. In what capacity?

10. Why did you leave Tectra rech? .. ,. . ,.*, , *" -* 11. Wha t type of trai('ling

.h.ave yo.u reqe_ivf;tp ~ii'!~:~ ~~9,0m ing emp l oyed in t he industry? 12 What tvoe of iod11slot~orofessiooal cectificatiaos do vo11 bald? ! 13. By whom did you receive that trainin g? *"' .5 \-\" t'.-Alt t s.s I R tH:) JI. -\-re,\ IM "J J~(7~a di d vo11 reoo ct ta? I 17. Did you have any subordinate employees? (b)(7)(C)

18. ~,1 gp 1c1es an proce ur~were yoU'~ 1 e y. *< ) ~2>ft7/1"'

t GM 3 gs L/)1m 7 [(11-P ()P-l3n9*"l~~

19. What were T ectra Tech's (TI) responsibilities as a condition of the license? -70a;J wHJ m,o """LtC , t,r-S{i 20. What was the safety culture there at Hunter's Point? VV\-\ 6+.ci't'")~

• 18.Did 'TT promote a safety conscious work environment.

if so , how? ttt.-\6ll, , e,:Jt!, 6 O * ,, 21. Did you receive training on how to report *safet°y related concerns, if so. who . . d h t . . ? r Y'xt> adm1nistere t e raining. L------------ -=--------......1

22. Was it acceptable at TI to r epo rt safety concerns to Mngt. Did it seem like a welcomed and encourag~d practice?

23. Are you aware of Bert Bowera, evE:r raisirig safety concerns to management?

24. How did you become aware of Mr. Bowers raising safety concerns?

25. Did Bowers tell you directly that he reported his safety concerns to management, If so when? N o.\-0 v-.ti--. 26. Did he ever raise his safety concerns to management i n your presence?

If so , to whom within the management chain did he raise concerns to? 27. Did anyone from management.eve r discus~.Bqw~rs' ~aising safety related concerns with . .. . . . ' ,* ... , .. ,. .. ., ' . . . you? If so, wh~t was tt,E;i content of those conversations? . NO . . . 28. Do you believe that Bowers was retal i ate d against for .r.ai~ing safety. related issues? If so . ' * ' . * * '~ I* ** ' I* . . \' ~. '. . . . 29. Are you aware if Bowers took hi~.co.ncern~ to ,.any other entities ~µtside TI? If so whom? 30. When personnel action _was taken again~t Bowers, what did management cite as the reason?

31. Were you interviewed by anyone f rom management or another entity within TT regarding your k nowledge of Bowers' concerns?

32. Are you aware of any other employees who were potentially retaliated against for raising safety related issues? 0 33. D~'d ou ever raise any safety related*issues, if so what happened?

-t,'), ~() R-t~~lG l'M ON 34. Do ou believe that Bowers had valid safety (~lated concerns? ~, {.,..S 35. Do you have 'any firs t-hand knowledge that the personnel action levied against bowers was based on his whistleblowing act i vity? /JO 36. From your understanding would there have been any major issues with TT just having bowers name removed from the license? 3 7. What kind of e mploy ee wa$ eow e r s? W h at kind of re pu t a tion did h e have? (:?Ol))) 38. How long did you work with Bowers? e l)(C) 1 . 3 9. Did you find Bowers complaint s v alid? Filename: !(b)(?)(C) !interview questions Directory: H:\NRC-01 Template: C:\Users\Hotel Guest\AppData\Roaming\Microsoft\Templates\Normal .dotm Title:

Subject:

Author: dly1 Keywords: Comments: Creation Date: 11/2/2011 7: 47: 00 AM Change Number: 2 Last Saved On: 11/2/2011 7:47:00 AM Last Saved By: !(b)(7)(C) I Total Editing Time: O Minutes Last Printed On: 11/1/2011 3:58:00 PM As of Last Complete Printing Number of Pages: 3 Number of Words: 499 (approx.) Number of Characters: 2,846 (approx.) U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comm iss ion Off ic e o f I nves ti g a tions Personal History Form l nVN11 ptlon Num ber: _. *--Date of Interview: ___ _ Full Name: __________

---

Employer:

---

Titte: ----------- Wortc Telephone Number: ____ _ Length of Employment ____ _ Employer'sAddress

Home Address: ------------------ Home Telephone Number: ____ _ Cellular Telephone Number: ____ _ Social Security Number: __ Sex: Male __ Female __ Race: ___ _ Date of Birth: ______ _, __ _ Place of Birth: ______ _ (b)(7)(C) Xl)(C J : ;>

• bow{){':>

t"olJ) k,.-k {UIS?,) .$&1.f<..,*1 IP O< 1-lJ vJ 1 & !.___""""' _ ___.I (b)(7)(CI ' l (O)(l)(GJ (b)(lXC) (b)(7)(C) fl (b)(7)(C r\:cJ I/J /J UC~ $~"'5-/--n-; I ~L A-vtlwt-~u_ ~--r-,') (b)(?)(C) 1 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Investigations Region I Field Office Witness Interview Questions Case Number: 1-2012-002 Case Title: Turkey Point H & I Alleger: Elbert Bowers Employer: Tetra Tech Interviewee: .... l (b_)(7_)(C_) ___ ...... Date: Thursda y J;sbmazy 9 , 2012 Location: State of California Office Building 455 Golden Gate Ave. San Francisco, CA 94102 Counsel Present: Tim Murphy , Esq. Start Time: n \ Y:l, .\\M, \?5 t End Time: \d ~-\J ~M {?Sr I. In what ca pacity a re you currently employed with Tetra -Tech? l (b)(7)(C) I 2. 3. How long have you been employed with TT? I" 4. Where were you e mplo y ed prior to TT? ["" I 1-2012-002 TI/ Hunters Point H & I l (b)(7)(C) 2 5. were ou em lo ed with our revious em lo er? 6. What is your professional background consistent of , what areas have you traditionally worked m_:-r q I 7. What is your ex erience in the Nuclear lndust the industry? 'X l 8. Wh a t a ce v m,c duti es and res ooo s ibiJitie s uod e t vm 1r curren t role wjth I I? r)(7)(C) 9. What type of training and or certifications do you hold with respect to your current job description? D b-\ ..Sh, ~\:j (_.Q .. r+1-f=. ccethc>-" 0~ ne,~ +-CCA.w"\.l? u-~ t0lv'.-( J o"' . \.;\,\~~ ivt,t~.s~.t:s (_ Co.Lt 6rtt-1irr. + (lefaz_0 10. Have you been trained on, or do you have an awareness of what is considered Nuclear Safety issues/concerns? 1 1-2012-002 TI/ Hunters Point H & I l (b)(7)(C) 3 11. Are employees trained and orientated on what issues are considered Nuclear Safety Concerns , if so by whom and how often? i ,t,5, . "T"f1:> 1 :._ .per -,Jt,,) f..t'J . 1 SiSlt,. 12. What mechanism is used whereby employees can raise Nuclear safety concerns? t-~l.~_Uh ~. <Luw---r h> ""'1.j~, ~e.t.-i:>o~

• 2,P..sL,~~

6ur.Jao-+o CArJ \+t.. ~~<-13. Is training provided regarding the use of the mechanisms for reporting safety issues, (i.e., are employees inst~cted on how to write a CR)? '{ .e.,._s . t-\-L > Q.v+-Lu..-,.A{.M.C,l~ Cc,.rc)~c t,\:--c..

• 14. What is the TI policy regarding in regards to employees ability raising safety related concerns?

-~ \tcAJL A-/io.FF\ t. 1 Ft,-, 1,lp O L,/p5 Qlt '::) \ V( N.,J.. :r. r.. . 15. Are employees protected from retaliation for raising safety related issues? "'"'~ 60 OJ~ -\-W-~-rotc.&1.°'

• " R~Fut.nc..-L. ~Q..c_ ~oc u..~ ,.\-16. Is this outlined in an employee handbook or procedural guide of sorts?, if so do you know where exactly? 17. When layoffs occur , how is it determined which employees are laid off and which are . retained?

\)6vq,lL'4 £<.;\ ~"Jl~. ,(3 .DivCf~lh-" . 4 *-l LY°' ok,\,L se.A-* 1-2012-002 TT/ Hunters Point H & I l (b)(?)(C) ( 4 18. Is it encouraged for employees to report N uclea r Safety Concerns to Management, and what are the mechanisms by which this can b e done? y-c,,_s 19. How do management personnel at Hunters Point document t hese notifications by employees? I s it just done on the work site level or is it elevated up the chain to members of management to corpora~e? L., t'.i> c,l.A; 1 FiovJ -f"'rv'6hovf-lorf~ vlc.1i~. 20. Do you Know Mr. E lbert "Bert" BOWERS? 2 1. How do you know Mr. BOWERS and wh~n did you first have contact with him? ,.,,.(b""")(?'""')(C ,,....) ---, E>ow<...rS> ~u.s wo-rkJ i) ,+r P-i w~*. l{., Pv0t _ .N\ r XJX C) 1 22. Under what circumstances did you initially h ave con ta ct with BOWERS? 6ovX<~ u)Q-..S ~so rl>c tJuJ Wcr{J

• 23. What kind of employee wa s BOWERS described as? to~~\ ct;_,.. u-w ~u cl'.::> \.D '"'c)~ ~:; ou-i-"6 let'"~ 5 f~ A\ o-\-cR--\--\~ I-V°' \...:,--5 0 FFt c.. ( . 24. Did you have confidence in his abilities as the Radiation Safety Officer (RSO)? y,.t\~c).
• , \ \A-t, i) lbri 1-!-~vL ah~ -\-t~l OV\.. l)l.rt-S~. f\..JO...

\ C ~-*.A- -A-() vJ-{.( '-rv\ 1-2012-002 n / Hunters Point H & I l (b)(7)(C) s 25. Did BOWERS raise safety related concerns to you , if so, please prov i de details? la'-(::> F-~\...o+v .s . 26. If so, what was done ? Lv~ ~wU> ~aLi-!4 :c,~~v'-(/S j ntrt-~lw~S )>OC.u~~-27. Were you ever advised by other managers at HP that BOWERS raised Safety related issues with them, if so who? 28. Are you aware of the nature of BOWERS safety relatoo issues?, particularly if they were Nuclear Safety Issues or Industrial Safety, which would be OSHA? t,.J \'.) ,\--~t I {LA-_b \!S~ t>owv~ "'-u-J. ~.s.svts w~ So.Fe-bf* c.,~~~ T~e_ StA"~ Dol))f"\ * µos-t ~o~wh""' ~~<--)

• 29. As tWCb>o x q I what have you done differently than that of Bert BOWERS? . (b x_, XC) 30. Did you find lum to be active in the area of QA/QC in that he wanted to continuously ensure tha t his he was in compliance and that employees were operating in a safe capacity from a radiation perspective?

N D , D if-\ \)) 0~ '1 I__ a o\-c..J"""-. \"\~{..,I/

31. Who determined that BOWERS would be no longer be working at HP ,..;? ______ ___, \SowU:S-r\t.-\...-e..,~ B0w0 (b)(7J(c)

,__ ______ ....,.._ ..... ~Ole-...l-h+c) I,..\-. (1<M1u-.5 p,(_p jk-t-\. £Vow,, D il5(j f\ ,f-CM,\,\ I\) R_(._ , (b)(7)(C) "e..v-J _s ~~(b=)(7~)(C_) _.....,.. _ _... 1-2012-002 n Hunters Poin H & I (b)(7)(C) 6 32. Do you know why BOWERS was T-ransferred?

• u.., k Nl,J *w~~ s~ .-\-?) ~tA)A--tJAtfuL 1)1r s~hd'\ * ,,,._ S,-rr--~n \W ~..A-wu-..) s~ cJJ"-dt--~'1 C o,-..DtAGk..J

~v<.St6uhV"I , 33. Can TT employees report safety concerns to the NRC? and is that explained in the training? '1 {,,-~ 34. Do Tr emp l oyees have a r esponsibility to also notify the Navy as it relate s to safety related co n cerns? -V..) \lA.("Z) h ._r_)(7-)(C-) ------------' (b)(7)(C) 35. Wa s BOWERS retaliated agai n s t in any way for raising nuclear safety concerns?

36. Did you have any discussions with BOWE~S following his L:aesfe1-?

\ft>, W!NL-rvv t.-SS~ :I c, r ("'\-l,f>5 ':J t>t,._sew, *~ \ l_,o~.:;, * ""~ L-01~ -t"o 0 o.-~bovu fx 4,s 37. Did site management ever identify to you that BOWERS was a trouble maker and was not looked upon in a favorab l e light? f\} 0 1-2012-002 TI/ Hunters Point H & I l (b)(7)(C) 7 38. Doe s TT follow a progressive discipline policy/ Please elaborate '-1 U , , ('.) o\--\oo f\'lcn,L\ Lf ~+-o

• h,,1v,(_ \t<.A~ts .l-"' ~let.C.-L 1"t) \1\-v~'vL

~h~cl... .. 39. How does TT identify performance concerns to it's employees? ~l\vt'4 L c \J (.( \ lA Ci\. h v ") ~t-ou--n.,c...,hA, cal Ltad. pa>vi&l S 40. Had BOWERS ever been placed on a PIP or receiv e d some form of notice? o:t-~+-~c.rL or. 41. Had BOWERS ever been s ubject to progressive discipline , if so please elaborate? tJ 0 42. Where there any other employees who raised safety related concerns who invariably were laid off? ~o 43. Do you know if an investigation was conducted regarding the issues ra i sed by Mr. BowERs? "I J..,.S. l'b)(7)(C) I 9,;s " c J c c,~t,tc.AJ. ~.x.JAe,:,, 44. Do you believe that BOWERS was discriminated against for raising safe ty related concerns? N D 45. Have there been problem s on s ite at HP as it relates to all radiation postings b e ing.utili ze d accordingly? Ni c._. 'fo\r'IJ ND \U 1 f>05h t)-l , iu-t-CoM-pl.4,~ ~+-k wwri't--('~~~*---. 1-2012-0 02 TT/ Hunters Point H & I "-!(b_H 7_HC_) __ __, 8 46. What is the requirement for the conduction ofradiation surveys at HP? U)U.,~\~ '5> '(V\ ()r"~ \.. ~\ I b,-~'°'~'4 \.\,~ '~ 4 7. Are comers being cut as it relates to the proper conduction of radiation surveys? 48. Are employees ensuring the safe-ke eping of a ll work related areas of responsibility for TI on site at HP? That is to say, if employees are working in certain zones on site, are they required to lock the equipment and that area up at the conclusion of the day , and is that being done? D V\,{_ -::L\'"\vlc>-~ t-w l Pr(" 8~c..r~ W~c-t.. w~ ovA-~'CK.-R-~to-~ ~" 49. Are audits conducted of your radiation program and by whom, and how often? ~t'\vi,~ ll li , I.A\~ ll 1 . \WLvt,_. .. _s Lt~* 50. Was there often pressure placed on the job assignments at TT by the construction management personnel to complete the job , even at the expense of radiation safety? NO 5 I. Have you observ e d or witnessed incidents wherein radiation surveys were not adequate l y c onducted according to procedure? (\-\-VW ~CMJ-l...--O...v<?).S S h,,-5 t'>~~-1-2012-002 n / Hunters Point H & I l (b)(7)(C) 9 52. Does HP operate under the assumption of safety conscious work envirorunent? And are the se things stressed? \.( {., ) . 53. Did BOWERS develop a reputation as a stickler for radiation safety/protection?

• tJ D
• 54. If so was that well received amongst the general TT employee base? 55. Were you privy to any conversations or meetings with TT management regarding BOWERS safety concerns and his vocal nature regarding safety? If so, please elaborate?

f\.) 0 56. Have you ever raised any safety related issues during your tenure of employment at HP , if so, please provide details? "1 t _) _ 57. Were you s ubject to any adverse action as a result of raising your safety related concern? ~o 58. Do you feel that the Radiation Protection program at HP is sufficient? .SuFf'\vu.--r ~:."~0 c\f" +~<bV\~ 59. Are TI employees effec tively abiding by the RP program according l y? it.S* 1-2012-002 TI/ H u nters Point H & I l (b)(7)(C) 10 60. How would you respond to the allegation that HP is a nuclear site being run like a construction site? 1"'~ \...-\s {._. e,t \~ 'J ~t-(:)'iaJ..~~~

61. Were you ever instructed by management to not document or write up safety issues raised by employees , and particularly, BOWERS? 62. Is there anything else you would like to add to the record at this time? 63. Did Bert BOWERS engage in protected activity by raising safety related concerns and was ultimately punished by the company for it? 1-2012-002 TT/ Hunt e rs Point H & I l (b)(7)(C)

.. 1 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Investigations Region I Field Office Witness Interview Questions Case Number: 2-2011-052 Case Title: Turkey Point H & I Alleger: Elbert Bowers Employer: Tetra Tech (b)(7)(C) Interviewee: (b)(l)(C) ....._ _______ ___J Date: Wednesday February 8, 2012 Location: State of California Office Building 455 Golden Gate Ave. San Francisco , CA 94102 Collllsel Present: Tim Murphy , Esq. Start Time: ~: L\ 0 f M p 'yf End Time: ,3 *.) \ ""' P S t" 1. In what capac i ty are you currently employed with Tetra -Tech? l (b)(7)(C) ' 0 2. How long have you been in your current position?

3. How long have you been employed with TT? r XJX C) 4. Where were you employed prior to TT? ['"' 2-2011-052 TT/ Hunters Point H & I l (b)(7)(C) 2 5. In what capacity were you employed with your previ o us employer?

r}(l)(C} 1. 6. What is your professional background consistent of , what areas have you traditionally worked in? (b}(J)(C) I I -(b)(IJ l , v} l)(C) 7. Wl;lat 1s")'our e x~erience in t he Nuclear Industry or employment with compani e s within the industry?

8. What are your dutie s and responsibilities under your current role with TT? (b)(7): c) 9. What type of training and or cert i fications do you hold with respect to your current job description?

.._ l l~o, 10. Have you been trained on, or do you have an awarenes s of what i s considered Nucl e ar Safety issue s/concerns? ,,

• yower l""..\-\+? -\-<a:"~

2-2011-052 TT/ Hu.nters Point H & I l (b)(7)(C) I 3 11. Are employees trained and orientated on what issues are considered Nuclear Safety Concerns, if so by whom and how often? l,) . 12. What mechanism is used whereby employees can raise Nuclear safety concerns 7 -C,o.. \ \ MCf'4jU-.S +-~u p....S LAf> 'tl> ~"5 o ( 1v Z f\C( .. dt Cor~' -&-,\.,Le,_ 0-GS D Cl W~ i)O~ ;'k,e.-._,+- / 13. ls training provided regarding the use of the mechanisms for reporting safety issues, (i.e., are employees instructed on how to write a CR)? * , . . ,-1 rv() \.Al '-,. 14. What is the TI policy regarding in regards to employees ability raising safety related concerns?

15. Are employees protected from retaliation for raising safety related issues? 16. Is this outlined in an employee handbook or procedural guide of sorts?, if so do you know where exactly? Y t,5 *. 1-~ S rt-l {nJ,1"~ 17. When layoffs occur, how is it determined which employees are. laid off and which are retained?

M O f\~\ s .J)r'-\f\ -, r-' J \-0 , vL, cf>u-t--f\O +-_g vre__ ~os (.__ Dtus.,~ ft<e-{Y\~ 2-2011-052 TT/ Hunters Point H & I l (b)(7)(C) .. 4 18. Is it encouraged for employees to report Nuclear Safety Concerns to Management, and what are the mechanisms by which this can be done? 19. How do management personnel at Hunters Point document these notifications by employees? Is it just done on the work site level or Js it elevated up the chain to members of management to corporate? b}U'v\ 3 Oti::> v.f 'TV u.cp#""a.<t-(_ kso 20. Do you Know Mr. Elbert "Bert BOWERS? 21. How do you know Mr. BOWERS and when did you :first have contact with him? \::>ooJv-..S wo-S o-+-H-P vJ h~ "'-L ~L-.I.""' .J,,oos-~ ) 22. Under what circumstances did you initially have contact with BOWERS? ['~' 23. What kind of employee was BOWERS described as? to MP"" 1-v\ 3 """I .,,, +---l\l uJ vJO<"" l J , 1!1f-c 'W o s ""' oeftcel,-J {f..5 0 \A * /' 24. Did you have confidence in his abilities as the Radiation Safety Officer (RSO)? f\.) 0 {--a.+-M -<b. l) l D{\ , ""'-llA\A(_)f\ +ifMC,(_ wl~t/V""'\* l (b)(7)(C) 2-2011-052 TT/ Hunters Point H & I . ( s 25. Did BOWERS raise safety relat e d concerns to you, if so, please provide details? , \I t,S . ' . . \ l 0~ O'"'L _s o F-f-..\--Ot-J

• 26. If so, what was done ? \A) lA.fA u.,, <-1 W\ ~-<""a,\\.; "'~ \J G-~o . 27. Were you ever advised by other managers at HP that BOWERS raised Safety related issues with them, if so who? ~"' I ~St-fvC,+t

~V\ VV\~ ('. MOCL Ctnv\ o+-V: ~e you aware of the nature of BOWERS safety related issues?, particularly if they were ("' Nuclear Safety lssµes or Industrial Safety, which would be OSHA? ~s the safety, did you have a lot of interaction with Bert regarding the nature of his complaints/issues?

30. Did you find him to be active in the area of QA/QC in that be wanted to continuously ensure that his he was in compliance and that employees were operating in a safe capacity from a radiation perspective

? -.. . IJ , '\ t'\.L ~<'.) v c l 17 I)~ <>"vs 31. Who determined that BOWERS wquld be I.aid er 7 t--) o +-6 v,c.-o-+-~s 5-kt.--t"tA-..S 2-2011-052 TT/ Hunters Point H & I l (b)(7)(C) 6 33. Can Tr employees report safety concerns to the NRC? and is that explained in the training?

34. Do TI employees have a responsibility to also notify the Navy as it relates to safety related concerns?

35. Was BOWERS retaliated against in any way for rai s'ing nuclear safety concerns?

36. Did you ha v e any discus s ions with BOWERS following hi s l a3 .w? ..[)OvJtrS UJvS 0"' ~:-k, ~+-LA)crk -6VJ.-W"'-F-nrf0

+-() I.),.~ {?(Y) iJ. l (b)(l)(C) I 1(3;;'{ ./-~~'cl L w (.,(, s >'"\ 't t-trvo-d'-CV,~. GJV\.; > 3 7. Did site managemen t ever id e ntify to you that BOWERS was a trouble maker and wa s no t looked upon in a favorable light? 1'J '() 2-2011-052 TI/ Hunter s Point H & I l (b)(7)(C) 7 38. Does TT follow a progressive discipline policy/ Please elaborate \~0-\-\-'\)~ ~uot&AJ-W ' ~+. 39. How does TT identify performance concerns to it's employees? '-\ t-(.,<"'L'{ ftr.t=c~c.e... ~\~a-lS

• 40. Had BOWERS ever been placed on a PIP or received some form of notice? 41. Bad BOWERS ever been subject to progressive d is cipline, if so please elaborate? 42. Where there any other employee s who raised safety related concerns who invariably were laid off? 43. Do you know if an investigation was conducted regarding the i s sues raised by Mr. BOWERS? C,or~IJ("V,.\-{_.

O ll;). {: 'c' O(!Ut.-Mer('\~ , Wv-_s Co('\ kJ--_ ') ~-bo:Ju-..s C.a.ll{J .\-4..-"'1 0 ........_.--------* 44. Do you believe that BOWERS was discriminated agamst for raising safety related concerns? NO 2-2011-052 TT/ Hunters Point H & I r)(7)(C) 8 ( 45. Have there been problems on site at HP as it relates to all radiation postings being utilized accordingly? ,J O I t0 0 * "5 (V\Q3 C) (L_ 46. What is the requirement for the conduction of radiation surveys at HP? u-t--U){..()c l V\ ; M~ D(A.,Ltf ~lAl'l/'4f f\tQ~l~ -0V'l, ~t._ 47. Are comers being cut as it relates to the proper conduction of radiation surveys? 48. Are employees ensuring the safe-keeping of all work related areas of responsibility for IT on site at HP? That is to say, if employees are working in certain zones on site, are they required to lock the equipment and that area up at the conclusion of the day , and is that being done? 49. Are audits conducted of your radiation program and by whom, and how often? 50. Was there often pressure placed on the job assignments at IT by the construction management personnel to comp l ete the job, even at the expense of radiation safety? rJ 0 51. Have you observed or witnessed incjdents wherein radiation s urvey s w e re not adequately conducted according to procedure? 2-2011-052 TI/ Hunters Point H & I l (b)(7)(C) 9 52. Does HP operate under the assumption of safety conscious work environment? And are these things stressed?

53. Did BOWERS develop a reputation as a stickler for radiation safety/protection?

00 54. If so was that well received amongst the general TT employee base? 55. Were you privy to any conversations or meetings with TT management regarding BOWERS safety concerns and his vocal nature regarding safety? If so, please *elaborate?

56. Have you ever rai sed any safety related issues during your tenure of employment at HP, if so, please provide details? y ~.:s 57. Were you subject to any adverse action as a result of raising your safety related concern? 58. Do you fee l that the Radi~tion Protection program at HP is sufficient?

2-2011-052 TI/ Hunter s Point H & I l (b)(7)(C) .,. 10 59. Are 1T employees effectively abiding by the RP program accordingly?

60. How would you respond to the alleg8rtion that HP is a nuclear site being run like a ' construction site? r <9Y)b-k'v.:~*°""'

c5 1k W \ fuDtolvu z C4.(_ un~ 61. Were you ever instructed by management to not document or write up safety issues raised by employees , and particularly, BOWERS? 62. Is there anything e l se you would like to add to the record at this time? 2-2011-052 TI/ Hunters Point H & I l (b)(7)(C) 1 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Investigations Region I Field Office Witness Interview Questions Case Number: 2-2011-052 Case Title: Turkey Point H & I Alleger: Elbert Bowers Employer: Tetra Tech Interviewee: ._!(b_H 7l_(c_) ___ __. Date: Friday February 7 , 2012 Location: State of California Office Building 455 Golden Gate Ave. San Francisco , CA 94102 Counsel Pre sent: Tim Mwphy , Esq. Start Time: ...5 *, lSl I\.-\ End Time: _______ _ 1. 2. H f ,~~ng have you been in your c r nt position? 3. How long have you been employed with IT? r~* I 4. Where were you employed prior to TT? 2-2011-052 TI/ Hunters Point H & I l (b)(?)(C) 2 5. Jn What ca p aci ty were you emp)nved wjth YOJJT DteYiOJJS eom l mrei r X JX C J -6. What is your professiona l back ound consistent of what areas have worked in? xixq 7. What is your exp e rience in t he Nuclear Industry or emp l oyment with companies within the industry?

8. What are your du t ies and responsibilities wider v o ur current role with T""'? (b)(l)(C)

9. What type of trainin g and or certificatio n s do you ho l d with respect to yo u r current iob description?

r)':"il(C) (b)(l)(\;1 I 0. Have you been trained on , or do you have an awareness of what is considered N uo l ear Safety issues/concerns? .'1 e..,,_s. _ 11. Are employees trained and orientated on what issues are considered N u clear Safety Concerns, if so by whom an d how often? y J./_) 2-2011-05 2 TT/ Hu nt ers Point H & I l (b)(7)(0) 3 12. What mechanism is used whereby employees can raise Nucle.ar safety concerns? / J. .J_~ -t..J, cAt. l'1 C..,O" \-t-L~ +-S UVd C)(t r ~, oJ ()A ti;> \---<.-L:r C.,cr ~\.ru ~()'"'-c5 ~, <Y'-tv t+-"P 13. Is training provided regarding the use of the mechanisms for reporting safety issues, (i.e., are employees instructed on how to write a CR)? 14. What is the IT policy regarding in regards to employees ability raising safety related concerns? Vu-y ~C,oU"b.t:) e_J . 15. Are employees protected from retaliation for rai sing safety related issues? 16. Is this outlined in an employee handbook or procedural guide of sorts?, if so do you know where exactly? \;/ , 17. When la yoffs occur, how is it determined whicb employees are laid off and which are retained? N04-3:)tr{,tA- \~ ~~+--off ~f--p~ ~\,ll-Jf l~ Sosc.J o~ 2-2011-052 TT/ Hunters Point H & I l (b)(l)(C) 4 18. Is it encouraged for employees to report Nuclear Safety Concerns to Management, and what are the mechanisms by which this can be done? ~.tS 19. How do management personnel at Hwiters Point document these notifications by employees? Is it just done on the work site level or i s it elevated up the chain to member s of management to corporate? -*i \A I\ V {) ..........

20. Do yo u Know Mr. Elbert "Bert" BOWERS? when did you first have contact with him? fivt-f-~t.~,hv-J~ ficr l(,-; _,.._ A-f\'1'~: c9-(.X) -22. Under what circumstances did you initially have contact with BOWERS? f,<(r -\-WC>-~ Rs o 'R-23. What kind of employee was BOWERS de scri bed as? l)oe..s.(\

1+-lta.J e__ 0~e,t.. bou"' *+zj o .Lv\ ~'*_ F,d!J ')V\V~, 2 4. Did you have confidence in his abilities as the Radiation Safety Officer (RSO)? N O .. ~o WU':> -1 s (,uf'\ r--n>r\kh-znae.

25. Did BOWERS raise safety related concerns to you, if so, please provide details? ~o 2-2011-052 TT/ Hunters Point H & I l (b)(7)(C)

( 5 26. If so, what was done ? 27. Were you ever advised by other managers at HP that BOWERS raised Safety related issues with them, if so who? fjO 28. Are you aware of the nature of BOWERS safety related issues?, particularly if they were Nuclear Safety Issues or Industrial Safety, which would be OSHA? 29. Who determined tha t BOWERS would be Jadiiff-!?" EowV.3 ~tU>Y"\ *+ lu\ci Of:f-7 'ft~, lAu 30. Do you know why BOWERS was~ ~{.;~ 'l'O+ \._o.1.J) O~t 31. Can TT employee s report safety concern s to the NRC ? and i s that explained in the training? TT/ Hunters Point H & I l (b)(7)(C) 6 32. Do TT employees have a responsibility to also notify the Navy as it relates to safety related concerns?

33. Was BOWERS. retaliated against in any way for raising nuclear safety concerns?

34. Did you have any discussions with BOWERS following his layoff? r,Jo 35. Did site management ever identify to you that BOWERS was a trouble maker and was not looked upon in a favorable light/ ~o 36. Does TT follow a progressive discipline policy/ Please elaborate

37. How does TT identify performance concerns to ifs employees?

C. ov.-~s~,w 8'--\ \~,C4k-.sup.>].~~~ b.Jo\. w,v~~ 38. Had BOWERS ever been placed on a PIP or rece ii ved some form of notice? 2-2011-052 n / Hunters Point H & I l (b)(7)(C) 7 39. Had BOWERS ever been subject to progressive discipline, if so please elaborate?

40. Where there any other employees who raised safety related concerns who invariably were laid off? () 41. Do you know if an investigation was conducted regarding the issues raised by Mr. BOWERS? 42. Do you believe that BOWERS was discriminated against for raising safety related concerns?

J\.)'() 43. Have there been problems on site at HP as it relates to all radiation postings being utilized accordingly? \J 'L~ , '3~+-* O +-fV\.qJ oA , 44. What is the requirement for the conduction of radiation surveys at HP? 45. Are corners being cut as i t relates to the proper conduction of radiation surveys? t> 2-2011-052 TI/ Hunters Point H & I l (b)(7)(C) ( 8 46. Are employees ensuring the safe-keeping of all work related areas of responsibility for TT on site at HP? That is to say, if employees are working in certain zones on site, are they required to lock the equipment and that area up at the conclusion of the day, and is that being done? f>ro () 47. Are audits conducted of your radiation program and by whom, and how often? tt.5 ( e,'"t ~MJL <-j 48. Was there often pressure placed on the job assignments at TT by the construction management personnel to complete the job, even at the expense of radiation safety? f\J D 49. Have you observed oi' witnessed incidents wherein radiation surveys were not adequately conducted according to procedure? N (J 50. Does HP operate .under the assumption of safety conscious work environment? And are these things stressed?

51. Did BOWERS develop a reputation as a stickle r for radiation safety/protection?

'\l iL S 52. If so was that weU receive d amongst the general TT emp loyee base? 2-2011-052 TT/ Hunters Point H & I l (b)(7)(C) ( 9 53. Were you privy to any conversations or meetings with TT management regarding BOWERS safety concerns and his vocal nature regarding safety? If so, please elaborate?

54. Have you ever raised any safety related issues during your tenure of employment at HP, if so, please provide details? related concern? 56. Do you feel that the Radiation Protection program at HP is sufficient?

l)t>--J O 'f\ D S (A~l ~L lu-"t 57. Are TI employees effectively abiding by the RP program accordingly? \)t5 58. How would you respond to the allegation that HP is a nuclear si te being run like a construction site? 59. Are there any other employees who might have more intricate knowledge of this situation, that you would recommend we talk to? 2-2011-052 TI/ Hunters Point H & I l (b)(7)(C) ( 10 60. Were you ever instructed by management to not document or wri t e up safety issues raised by employees , and particularly , BOWERS? f'JO 61. ls there anything else you would like to add to the record at this time? 2-2011-052. TT/ Hunters Point H & I l (b)(7)(C) 1 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Investigations Region I Field Office Witness Interview Questions Case Number: HO I 1 : -Case Title: Turkey Point H & I Alleger: Elbert Bowers Employer: Tetra Tech Interviewee: .... !(b_)(?_)(C_) __ __. Date: Wednesday February 8, 2012 Location: State of California Office Building 455 Golden Gate Ave. San Francisco, CA 94102 Counsel Present: Tim Murphy, Esq. Start Time: 1 C) *-5~ A--'-End Time: \ \ '-\..\$ f:4 1. In what capacity are you cl:lf[ently employed with Tetra -Tech? r)(?)(C) 2. 3. How long have you been employed with TI? ["' 4. Ll"'"'" vou emnlnved nrinr tn II" 2-2011-052 TT/ Hunters Point H & I l (b)(7)(C) 2 S. In what capacity were you employed with your previous employer? / 6. What is your professional background consistent of , what areas have you traditionally worked in Cbx 1 x c) 7. What is your experience in the Nuclear Industry o r empl o yment w i th companies within the industry? :1>),:1 x c J 8. What are your duties and re s ponsibilitie s under your current role with TT? l (b)(?)(C) 9. What type of training and or certifications do you hold with respect to y our curr e nt job description? l'lb': , D i irn iJ x re:c>r-----------------------------

10. Have you been trained on, or do you hav e an awarene s s of what is considered Nuclear Safety is s ues/concerns?

2-2011-052 (\? (y~ (2.,U,bt+/-s 10 ~t ~. ~<J, M.) {(SO jL ._Sv ,~f-t) ¥\I.JV\ tf\ s~L,-I TI/ Hunters Point H & I l (b)(7)(C) 3 11. Are employees trained and orientated on what issues are considered Nuclear Safety Concerns, if so by whom and how often? if.b .. D""'-1 c.:s ~+ ~"'° leJ<..J L \flW'-~'"'~, 12. What mechanism is used where b y emp lo yees can raise Nuclear safety concerns?

• 5M~\<t.\~~ (t(f.l') 1 (R ~~tS o--J o( fOrttOy>~

.:r...J t-'Lf' ~.fO<S C-c.t.M.. 7_,eA""o Ly'\CtcJt,..\-:5 r r~ . 13. Is training provided regarding the use of the mechanisms for reporting safety issues, (i.e., are employees instructed on how to write a CR)? t..s, 1 ~r o\J t Mb IS"\ s a f t.,.*'t r,wrc(j -u, 14. What is the TT policy regarding in regards to employees ability raising safety related concerns?

15. Are employees protected from retaliation for raising safety related issues? 16. Is this outlined in an employee handbook or procedural guide of sorts?, if so do you know where exactly? vl Z-.S 17. When la yoffs occur, how is it detennined which emp loy ees are l aid off and which are retained?

2*2011-052 TI/ Hunters Point H & I l (b)(7)(C) 4 18. Is it encouraged for employees to report Nuclear Safety Concerns to Management, and what are the mechanisms by which this can be done? 19. How do management personnel at Hunters Point document these notifications by employees? Is it just done on the work site level or is it e le vated up the chain to members of management to corporate? \)Q.Re._r.J) \ 5 0 " \. ~Sue__ ., , I+ Co vv!.!) Be ~..A r-J v~ -\7; <n ~* 20. Do you Know Mr. Elbert " Bert" BOWERS? 21. How do you know Mr. BOWERS and when did you first have contact with him? A { Fo+-\-.-..I vJ ,.1,t,... ~u-+-Wk.-. k '" W'tl fLSo 22. Under what circumstances did you initially have contact with BOWERS? 23. What kind of employee was BOWERS described as? Be-.rT ~C>.b t)1*-G,l,U ~J \ (f..~lft-\-\ o~ ~t \,A)\,~ 'h'-5 Co-vJ~~t.u 6o+-~ oA-tJ{W W0t-\rb ~h?A.-1-u:;.\, 24. Did you have confidence in his abilities as the Radiation Safety Officer (RSO)? rJ O * /~L<-T uJuSA't-+'4.-'Fie..-!J) h 2-2011-052 TI/ Hunter s Point H & I l (b)(7)(C) 5 25. Did BOWERS raise safety related concerns to you, if so, please provide details? ~o 26. If so, what was done ? 27. Were you ever advised by o ther managers at HP that BOWERS raised Safety related issues with them, if so who? tJ 0 28. Are you aware of the narure of BOWERS safety related issues?, particularly if they were Nuclear Safety Issues or Industrial Safety, which would be OSHA? 0 " ,~ ~~c) ~.\:-1:,~ iJj L<)!.('L-vi"'~ 29. As the F'KcJ l did you have a lot of interaction with Bert regarding the nature of his complaints/issues? , . I \ 0 * * ~o+-Sc ~u.~-s~ -.w.-* W?-30. Did you find him to be active in the area of QA/QC in that he wanted to continuously ensure that his he was in compliance and that employees were operating in a safe capacity from a radiation perspective? \-\c -\-r,0 31. Who detennined that BOWERS would be Laid off? ~(}w(..r.S 1S <:S nGL c~/Ov/ '(.f_J 2-2011-052 TT/ Hunters Po int H & I l (b)(7)(C) j 6 T~f=t...<'r<..J

32. Do you know why BOWERS was * . 8,:.rT h.(:4J Cl. ~-~u r .t.u---t w L f,,.. , o s-fw::f:-. bV~ _6Jrvv ~ploJ~ W J f\J o fZ.o._iJ 1,oto31 C,a. (_ ~US""'-.-lL~vc;,i.*l ww A-,Ul,W~ C,,llwtJ, ,~ DF-r-()A.. S~F-:f--33. Can TT employees report safety concerns to the NRC? and is that explained in the training?

34. Do TI employees have a responsibility to also notify the Navy as it relates to safety related concerns?

vi _J -35. Was BOWERS retaliated against in any way for raising nuclear safety concerns?

36. Did you have any di scussio ns with BOWERS following his J~eff? pv-sv~u..,i

\~ Jo+. A Lo-:5 w) 8~ . R~ .Be.r+, .s u sW' hw> .!!:9 LV'c..tl . 37. Did site management ever identify to you that BOWERS was a trouble maker and was not looked upon in a favorable light? \-0 () 2-2011-052 n / Hunters Point H & I l (b)(7)(C) 7 38. Does TT follow a progressive discipline policy/ Please elaborate '{~, 39. How does TT identify performance concerns to it's employees? 7~ll::: fv t .uL. 'i=-rs+-* 40. Had BOWERS ever been placed on a PIP or received some form of notice? ~o 41. Had BOWERS ever been subject to progressive discipline, if so please elaborate?

42. Where there any other employees who raised safety related concerns who invariably were laid oft? tJ O . 43. Do you know if an investigation was conducted regarding the issues raised by Mr. BOWERS? -'t'": n~ n J -\ 1 11 /\ ___ _ j_ ,~ tte-, 1',,Ul .S l-Ot'-..i.--~.S T._ L,(TV')~c;;n

't WOu\_D ~L--z..\-. 44. Do you believe that BOWERS was discriminated against for raising safety related concerns? 2-2011-052 TT/ Hunters Point H & I l (b)(7)(C) ( 8 45. Have there been problems on site at HP as it relates to all radiation postings being utilized accordingly ? ~0 f\-t-r'<-h~vt... l)lt,<A. J-S~ x:_..rt-~+., ~(.A,+-..L.,-\-' _s 13~ tc,.<<(.(.;~ . 46. What is the requirement for the conduction of radiation surveys at HP? -<I-"' t (9 '""" ~, --o ~~o\~"'\ _.. \,l)~l'-\ ~u~1 OL~ ~CJ.\* 47. Are comers being cut as it relates to the proper conduction ofradiation surveys? 1\Jo 48. Are employees ensuring the safe-keeping of all work related areas of responsibility for TI on site at HP? That is to say, if employees are working in certain zones on site , are they required to lock the equipment and that area up at the con~lusion of the day, and is thatbeingdone? \,/'lS 1 Qsu+-. fitl,~~ (7"'~t"'-\~ WW(... a, . .J w ""~ (.;{ p fer tJof L () e,,tc '-;, LAP. 49. Are audits conducted of your radiation program and by whom, and how often? ~-G~ * ~-LU>\.-l"'\. M~o ru~cJ,c :1>crt--h~

50. Was there often pressure placed on the job assignments at TI by the construction management personnel to complete the job, even at the expense of radiation safety? 51 Have you observed or witnessed incidents wherein radiation surveys were not adequately conducted according to procedure? n / Hunters Point H & I l (b)(7)(C)

. . . 9 52. Does HP operate under the assumption of safety conscious work environment? And are these things stressed?

53. Did BOWERS develop a reputation as a stickler for radiation safety/protection? ,J c) . 54. If so was that well received amongst the general TT employee base? 55. Were you privy to any conversations or meetings w i th TT management regarding BOWERS safety concerns and his vocal nature regarding safety? If so, please elaborate?

rJ 0 56. Have you ever raised any safety* related issues during your tenure of employment at HP, if so, please provide details? ""' ~) ' 57. Were you s u bject to any adverse action as a result ofraising your safety related concern? tJ O I u+-J)f_') L3 ti-(A r)(J)(C) I ~r)(J~)("" C)~---------'-----.1

58. Do you feel that the Radiation Protection program at HP is sufficien t? 2-2011-052 0{_ l-5 --t JC l'(A~A _ LO~ j)O"~j , TT/ Hunters Poi n t H & I l (b)(7)(C)

• 10 59. Are TT employees effectively abiding by the RP program accordingly?

60. How would you respond to the allegation that HP is a nuclear site being run like a construction site? k) ,Dr-.._5 . 61. Were you ever instructed by management to not document or write up safety issues raised by employees , and particularly, BOWERS? 62. Is there anything else yo u would like to add to the record at this time? 2-2011-052 TI/ Hunters Point H & I r)(7)(C)

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Investigations Region I Field Office Case Number: 1-2012-002 Case Type: H & I Case Agent: S/A (b)(?)(C) Facility/Site

Hunters Point Naval Shipyard Decommissioning Project Interviewee:

!(b)(7)(C) I Date: October 25 , 2011 Background

1. 2. Witness Interview Questions

4. Have you held any other positions other than the above identified with your current employer?

7. When did you begin your employment in the Nuclear Industry?

r x , x b I 8. Why did you leave Tectra Tech? 9.f~at tvne of tcajnjnn have YQI I CACffliYed Sire becoming employed in the industry?

10. who~ di%'OU receive that training?

J~ I~ tD--.0U-S

11. What is your professional background , i.e.-laborer, electrician , etc? 12. What are your duties and responsibilitie s under your current position?

( 13. What were your duties and responsibilities during your tenure of employment with Tectra Tech? 14. Who did you report to? [>{ * ;,l 4 J~ f l,"t(_ -,:J w-(

• 15. Did you have any direct reports?, if so please identify?

'~ UO 16. What policies and procedures were you guided by? 17. What were Tectra Tech's (TI) responsibilities as a condition of the license? V Wt tr\..vS ~Mt t.J 18. Whst as the safety ~ulture there at Hunter's Po i ntf (b)(l)(C) _5c.l: -1 W 1.&,J G '=>T ef" 6 s(-. .___ ___ ---,.::-:-~- ........ 18.Did TI pr mote a safety conscious work environment, if so , how? r b)(l)(C) I s(,l ~,,c, 19. Did you receive training on how to report safety related concerns, if so, who r-~u -* /. administered the training? &::;;f "")20. Was it acceptable at TT to report safety concerns to Mngt. Did it seem like a welcomed r --* -tn~1ncouraged practice? ~{. e) ~;;you aware of Bert Bowers ever raising safety concerns to management'/~~ _ ~22. H~~ou become aware of Mr. Bowers raising safety concerns? ¥i ~LJ 23. Did Bowers tell you directly that he reported his safety concerns to management , if so W\ 5~-1 when? DCC* 'l&!O. 5'-t Lif4-~,-; /',)Ov* /)[jvJtrJ \ vol" 24. Did he ever raise his safety concerns to management in your presence? If so, to whom within the management chain did he raise concerns to? 25. Did anyone from management ever discuss Bowers' raising safety related concerns with you? If so, what was the content of those conversations? J..-)b 26. Do you believe t7t Bowers was retaliated against for raising safety related issues? If so why? v{j1<.$ 27. Are you aware if Bowers took his concerns to any other entities outside TT? If so whom? 28. When personnel action was taken against Bowers , what did management cite as the reason? 29. Were you interviewed by anyone from management or another er.itity within TT regarding your knowledge of Bowers' concerns?

30. Are you aware of any other employees who were potentially retaliated against for raising safety related issues? 31. D i d you ever raise any safety related issues, if so what happened?

32. Do you believe that Bowers had valid safety related concerns?

33. Do you have any first-hand knowledge that the personnel action levied against bowers was based on his whistleblowing activity?

34. From your understanding would there have been any major issues with TI just having bowers name removed from the license? 35. What kind of employee was Bowers? What kind of reputation did he have? 36. How long did you work with Bowers? 37. Did you find Bowers complaints valid?

(b)(?)(C)

1) r , , ,c, l"'l(C) { I = 3. r" ~) r l (b)(7!C) la) ~l(..N :r..,J I-) "'<-kw---\-lt°'I-U"'-'s~

6 tV\.l.L.-[.__x 1 x-c> __ ___, :f' ..be_ to M ..A +-C Ir,~ ,6,~ (o-r-fc r:s+-:J. / 3 V ,J \:; u h*L-,h s /-!6-t-~ I 'iJ /1.irl..-Wt>~ f,v, ,,-, r') I~ D ,-------(b)(?)(C) iD \ ~,r-\-t v "'lrv-_s f -t * ~1., ;: ___ t'i(-__ +t. ____ __, ) J\.uJ (ll'( () r k.J I tv (b)(?)(C) .,.._f_t (S_1-_/\J_"-'-<-_* -~--1 1 M~o£~~~~s.. / I *, i) JJ O +.--e11 -.. ,' '1 , lWt Fe, ..J , ;s i !) A-N Nvt 4. L ']:,r'\ -Suv, ~l-+r °t:.{ l VI) ; I I (b)(l)(C) -E~\j.p~+Dp~ Find r1" ~f~-f f'-lOVl"::5 tJ~ &Ji..tf-~,t,...cc. c N , 'DL~ . w(/V) -.__l (b)(',:,11 7)(C-) ---J L . ==-'/_,; \ . .--~w-L , , 0 . ~o (b)(7)(C) r l(7)(C) (b)(7)(C) (b)(7)(C) c::s > riS <:::) a 1 \~ -,-::::> <c:> 0 U.S. N ucl e a r R egulatory Com m ission Office of* Investigations Personal -History Form lnveatlgatlon Number: _/_".' ,I.PL it -lJ()a.,_ Full Name: -=---------,----------___J Employer. 72 6;-A k ,4 Ea l (b)(7)(C) I Title: .J.--------- -----Wori< Telephone Numbe r;...,: ,.;;;;::===::::;- -Length of Employment J lC'x c> L '---...J---.-----' Employer's Address: -)t) ~o:c:-(b)(7 J(C) Home Address: ,___ __ ~(b)~(7)~(C!"'") -------..-------.------___J Home Telephone Number. ""--r.:-(b=)(7=)(C~) -------J Cellular Telephone Number: ......._ _______ ....... Social Security Number: _----__ . Sex: Male __ Female ----l (b)(7)(C) Race: . ..__ __ -;(:::::;: b)(7:;:)(;:;: C):,_L_ ______ _ Date of Birth: (bJ(7J(Cl Place of Birth: ( U.S. Nuclear Regu l atory Comm issi on Office of In ve stigations P ersonal Hl s t orv F orm Investigation Num bw: _L_. e# 0 1>

• Oo Date of Interview:

I)_ 11., l (b)(7)(C) Full Name:. ----------------- ,---Employer: '\'eJ (,4 ~& EC l (b)(7)(C) I Title:_ . Wom~T~;r,e-p-ho~0 ne __ N_u_m_be __ r.l~(~~,: C~)====:::::::!: ====~, Length of Employment J_: x_'x_c5 _____ ,_, Employer's Address: Sh , (b)(7)(C) Home Address: ----::::=======!1!!111!!!!~~~====~=---

---

. (b)(7)(C)

Home Telephone Number: Cellular Telephone Number""""=======-- -,----------------' Social Security Number: -----Sex: Male a' Female __ Race: ._!(b)-(7)_,c_J __ L Date o Place C.1"'\c.\\ f Birth: of Birth: l (b)(7)(C) (b)(7)(C) (b)(7)(C) I I . - U.S;. N uclear Regulatory Commission O ff ice o f* Investigations Personal *Histo ry Fo r m lnveatlgatlon Number: _______ _ Date of Interview: J F-e l W 1 L l (b)(?)(C) l Full Name:_ . -,-..... , -------,----- ....,.c--,, o.-------Empl r: (b)(?)(C) TlUe: ----------t (b)(7)(C) Work T elephone Num b ~~---~---Length of Employment -.....--.-----Employer's Addre;::;ss:=,;

...,,,.....

___ ... Ci_7 _f:_;_c:.......,.l_.1-_ ........ _""""""' ....... -S......:...;;: ~;...:;t '.=......ll.l.C::~ A...: (~..:..)"--1..-1-..i...;:; 2 (b)(7)(C) Home Address: Home Telephone Number: _+ff-f'+----- Cellular Telephone Number: :'6<>11.c! eh Jt atJ~ Social Security NumbB r: __ Race: Date of Birth: (b J (?)(CJ t (b-:-:,:)(7);:-;:: (C:':"'") -------.,__---J Place of Birth: E "".'4 1 L * .. ( U.S. Nuclear Regu la t ory Comm issi on O ff ic e o f In ve sti gations Per sonal His t o ry F orm I nves tigation Number:~-~-Q0 2 Date of lntef iew* z./q / 1 7 (b)(7)(C) l Full Name: '------..- \------=--------' Employrc Te:bc01 Tee h F e i.nc. (b)(7)(C) 1 Titte: -'-------:::::=====

!::L=----

__, Work Telephone Length of Emplo Employers Addr Home Address: Number: yment: ess: r Jlt}(C J r)(7)(C) Number: (b)(7)(C) r)(O)(C J (b)(7)(C) Home Telephone Cellular Telepho ne Number I Soclat Security Number. ------Sex: Mate 1 / Female __ (b)(7)(C) Race: ....__ ______ _ (b)(7)(C) Date of Birth: ~~~~~~----.....- -l (b)(7)(CJ Place of Birth: E: t,.,\ ~, l : ._ ________ _. .., (b X'X C) ( U.S. N ucl ear Reg ula t o ry Commission Offic e of Inves t igations Pers onal History F o r m lnvntlgatlon Num ber: -'--Q Q I 3.

• ooa. Date of Interview:

u~ \ ) '-. l (b)(7)(C) Full Name:--------------

---

Employer:

T L?t:: H E c__ (b)(7 XC) Title: '----------m--------'--, Work Telephone Number: -~-)(-) ______ ___, Length of Employment

---

.----Employer's Address;::.:,,:

..:;::::==== ~==\-l._=*"','L.===:::::=:=======~=t::CA-::;:;;:::=::::f:::::!~ ~(b)(7)(C) Home Address: (b)(7)(C) Home Telephone Number: Cellular Telephone Numbe --------Socia I Security Number: ------Sex: Male <"' Female __ l (b)(7)(C) Race: '---....,-.::=-

---

. (b)(7)(C)

Date of Birth: ~~:---,.. _______ ...J (b)(7)(C) Place of Birth,::.. =~~~~====='--------. ,:: l (b)(l)(C) '-{'\'\G\ ,\.. ": ....._ ___________ _. ( U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Co mmission Off ic e of Investigations 1n!:!!~~!!!!1~t~z,f ~r: 2-Date of Interview: f!D -J l, -I I Full Name: 5.u& A::n { .. ) 1-*rfj j n i A Employer: _,,fM ........ &,_, 1 __ S __________ _ Tltle: '.Qr @ l (b)(7)(C) Work Telephone Number:._ ______ _ Length of Employment f t..1 (5 , oJ-'/JP.5 , J Employer's Address: a (j> S l (b)(7)(C) I Home Address: L---"""1ILl (b)rn'(7)(;;,:;C)------,__ _________ --J Home Telephone Number: Cellular Telephone Number ..__ ______ __. Soclal Security Number: __ Sex: Male __ Female v Racet l(7l (C) I (b)(7)(C) Date of Birth:.._ _________ ....._ __ (b)(7)(C) Place of Birth: ,_ ___________ __, U.S. Nuc l ear Regulatory Commission Office o f Invest i gations Personal H is t o ry F o rm ln wettgatton Num ber: _I

• 1)-o, J. -t/)~ Date of Interview:

AA V \ --2a ll\ l (b)(7)(C) Full Name: L. _________________ __, Tltte: (b)(7)(C) Work Telephone Number. ......., ______ __. Length of Employment ____ _, Employer's Addr . .:*=sa::=-=========================::::;-

---

l (b J(7)(C) I Home Address: L------------------'-

---

(b l(7)(C) Home Telephone Number: Cellular Telephone Numbe~r:!::::::::======:;---"

• l (b)(7)(C) Social Security Number: L... --------..1 Sex: Male )0 Female (b)(7)(C)

Race: L------r;;(b'.":'7")(7~)(C ,:-:--) _..____ ______ ---, Date of 8111h: -.,.,,..,..,,,,,.,.,,.,...

---

___J (b)(7)(C)

Place of Birth: L.__ ______ ____. ( U.S. Nuc l ear Regulatory Commission O ffice o f Investigations Pers o n al History Form lnV'Ntfgatton Nu mbs: _. _____ _ Dat~ of Interview: IO -,;J. 7 -t I Full Name: b:::::;;:::;;:::========;.-------- 1--x,xc J 1 M (7)(C) Employe::r:~. ~=====:::;-'

---

J (b)(7)(C)

Title: . (b)(7)(C) l C I Work Telephone Number: e. \ -l(b X J,..X CJ _______ .....,1 Length of Employment r-x..lo!i xCJ _____ ..__ ______ __,I Employer's Addre~ss~:

.i.....----------

---"'-------, J~~) l Home Address: L----======~----------.....1 l (b)(7)(C) Home Telephone Number: L--------Cellufar Telephone Number: SG..V'\1 :f Social Security Number: __ Sex: Male ./ FemaJe __ J (b)(7)(C) Race: _ J (b)(7)(C) Date of Birth: . l (b)(7)(C) Place of Birth: 1 L.. _____ ...... ( U.S. Nuclear Regulatory C ommission O ff ic e o f I nvest i gations Personal H i story Form l nVNtf gaU on Num ber: _. -*--Date ot Interview. 'o a , -I J t (b)(7)(C) Full Name: ,1.,,: """x c.,.,...> ------,,------' Employer:~:=c*====~

---

~ l (b)(7)(C)

TJtte: ~----..J----------Work Telephone Number: r J X C} Length of Emptoyme.,J -~-,)(c*> _____ ___. Employer's Address: ------------------- l (b)(7)(C) HomeAddress: L. ____________ .J--------Home Telephone Number: -======--. l (b)(7)(C) Cellular Telephone Number: L..------J Social Securtty Number: __ Sex; Male __ Female v l (b)(7)(C) I Race:. . ......__===':=!==

---

, (b)(7)(C)

Date of Birth: -:s...----------- (b)(7)(C) Place of Birth: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Co mm iss_ion Off ic e o f In vestigation s P e rs onal History F o r m lnvatlgatlon Number: ==. ------Full Nam Title: --'-------""-------Home Address: k'Tr.:'_:c"m"1 (b)(7)(C) Home Telephone u Cellular Telephone Numbe Social Security Number. __ Sex: Male~ Female (b)(7)(C) Race: '=--=-=-------------. (b)(7)(C) Date of Birth: ------------(b)(7)(C) Place of Birth: r,;:'(b);;t,.,.,.. __________ _,_ _______ --, E""I\\*~ *. U.S. N ucl ear Regu l at ory Commission O ff ic e o f Inv e s t ig a tions P e r so na l His t ory F orm lnveatlgatlon Nu mber: _J__-J. o t) -DQ fi:. Data of Interview: O:Lvorf -1.1.. l (b)(7)(C) Full Nam~e=;..,i -~----......----

---

===--[x1)(c> Employ~e:!:::::::.;;~~~~~===

.---l (b)(7)(C) Tltle: . ...!:::c:-=======~~======- --W o rk Telephone NumberJ'"l!ll::'!!IJl!x: ""'~ Length of Employment ._..F_.._ ........ =~ Emptoyer'sAddress: /./f//V~ ~/A/r -,,q/./ ~CD U (b)(7)(C) Home Address: ----"""""P.!!"!'!!!'!'~-------t- ---==::::::===(b)(7)(C) Home Telephone Number: Cellular Telephone Number:"====== ---' Soc i al Security Number: -Sex: Male ){ Female l (b)(7)(C) Race:. =====;1 (::: b)(::::: 7)(~C):::::::::::::::...._ _______ _, Date of Birth: ;::::;::=======:;---- l (b)(7 J(C) l Place of Birth: ._ _______ ___ E\.M 4 l l *# l (b)(7)(C) U.S. N ucl ear Reg ula t ory Commission O ff ic e o f Investigations Perso n al H is t ory F orm lnveatlgatlon Number: _L~ ,a: 0 IJ. -0 0 a Date of Interview: J..-7 -'2 o I :7. l (b)(7)(C) Full Name:,'-* __________ ___, ------Employer:

te...

+/-r o... =re c h

• l (b)(7)(C) I Title:. ._: -------' l (b)(7)(C)

Work Telephone Number: ....,..,,,; ~======::::::;----' Length of Employm e n~"-1 G x-'x c_> ____ .....,~ Employer's Addr~iLt,_....c,~ ..:-...i.....~ ~J.---',;Q;;,.:..;:;;.. _-"""...i.....i-"'- ---""""""""'-.a...

---

, (b)(7)(C)

Home Address: (b)(7)(C) Home Telephone Number: '----------' Cellular Telephone Number: ~4 Social Security Number: ----__ Sex: Male V---F rmale ~)(7)(C) Race: "----~==-------------. (b)(7)(C) Date of Birth: -;:i...... __________ ___, (b)(7)(C) Place of Birth: L_ _______ J-- U.S. N ucl ear Regulatory Comm ission O ffice of Investig at ions Pe r s on al Hi st ory For m lnveatlgatlon Number: -I--J. o , l:: * /J cJ '1. Date of Interview: -t; g -/2-J (b)(?J (C) L Full Name: ..... _______________ ____, Employer.

---

~-zrn...A

.......... .....____.-P-_:_ e... ..... u ___ ___ $'-=--L-(b)(7)(C) Title: --, __________________ ____J (b)(7)(C) Work Telephone Numbe=r==I!:-

---

.,__

..... )( l(C) Length of Employment Employe(s Address::,.,,..;::;::;::::=::====~

~=2~=~===

~~==',.~/..;;,~_-'1-,:.... -., (b)(7)(C) Home Address: -<L----4:::7 =-------1---------------J (b)(7)(C) Home Telephone Number: ---------- Cellular Telephone Number: _____ _ SoclaJ Security Number: ----* __ Sex: Male .. Female (b)(7)(C) Race: -"--==-...r,;--:=

-----..._--, (b)(7)(C) Date of Birth: --.::=====~~!!!!!!!:~~~

j (b)(7)(C) Place of Birth: ,_ ________ _ U.S. Nuc l ear Regulatory Comm is sion Off ic e o f Invest i gati o ns Personal History Form l nveet lgatlon Num a.: _. *--Date of lnterew: (1,_, (\ Jc '.J (\ \ (b)(7)(C) Full Name: !:=:=======::::::;"---------,.-,.. Employer: fL-'-ixc_i ______ ___.I t-__ Title: ------------Work Telephone Number. ------Length of Employment

---

Employer's Add~~ess~:

---

.

l (b)(7)(C) Home Address: L--------------------------. Q l (b)(7)(C) Home Telephone Number: ---------. (b)(7)(C) Cellular Telephone Num"""-L-----------. (b)(7)(C) Soclal Security Number. (b)(7)(C) Date of Birth: Place of Birth: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commiss i o n Off ic e o f I nvest i gations Pe rsonal Hi st o ry Form ln veet lptlon Num ber: __ * *--Date of lntel,lll"ma 1"" .... __ L.:.;;//J.:,L,..l/...;_;;J-....;5;;....-.L..-/20---=-/.:.../ _______ _, (b)(7)(C) I FuHName:.=;;;;;:;;;===-============::::!.----_.::.---- 1 1,x1xC> Em1p*~~-L---------------,--=======-------------: ~ ' (b)(7)(C) r b X7)(C) Titte: ._ ___ ___. '------------------J Work Telephone Number. L.( '6 -*-======:.........,;;........, Length of Employment:~ . ..;;::rx=')(=C) =======!..,_----------, r Xl X C) I Employer's Add;.!re~ss::!,;: ~-------------------,.,.. l (b)(7)(C) I Home Address: t..--~====

!!!!!!=!!!!!!!!~~~-=======-

Home Telephone Numbe (b)(7)(C) Cellular Telephone Numl:>er: 1,:a::::=======-

---

' Social Security Number: __ Sex: Male __....--Fama~ (b)(7)(C) Race: ====i':!"!':'~,L_-----------, (b)(7)(C) Date of Birth: Place of Birth:

U.S. Nuc l ear Regulatory C o m mission O ffice of Investigations Pers o nal H i story Form lnVNtlptfon Num ber: __ ---Date of Interview: /CY

• Z62 * /) Full Name: b 6ed-~> s;,.....;

& , ,,'i'f'ZC employer: Z.::c.... c=-c.. TIiie , 4.L--J.,~ s~,-C}.(+i,:,,,-/L.l.,n£~t ~) Work Telephone Number: YI~ 5/L/-27c.? Length of Employment -2 /Z. ....,,../ Employer'sAddress: 2..~*h-'-~ ./L,-.. +;:a-.e.L.H:.o (fl 9Yl2'/ (b)(7)(C) Home Address: ...__ __ 1i.:iii:v,:;-

---

,---------

-...J (b)(7)(C) Home Telephone Number: L...r-.,..,,...------.....1, Cellular Telephone Number: Social Security Number: Sex: Male Female r::-:-:::: ~-----........J Race: l (b)(7)(C) I .__ _ ___,.(--, b)(""'" 7)(C.,,.,..)---------Date of Birth: _ Place of Birth: ( U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Investigations Region I Field Office Case Number: 1-2012-002 (b)(7)(C) Case Type: H & I Case Agent: S/ Facility/Site: Hunt ers Point Nayal Shipyar ecommissioning Project Interviewee: Bert Bowers Date: October 26, 2011 Alleger Interview Questions Back g round 1. 2. Are you currently employed, if so by whom?{) tJ w f Te, t-,~ ll.<-k. In what'capacity / title are you currently employed?

3. How l ong have you been with your current employer?

Have you held any other positions other than the above identified with your current 4. 5. employer?~ '<.!'5 . ti) /fv.-03 po,"'-f.* p<f'u1o1.L.5 {e.y ;UCw ~lc) Whom were you employed with prior to your current employer? L~v t w n~ ht./ 6. In what capacity? &d,1t 1--1°"" .5~1-f o.tf.*1 lc./ i?.e-f

• 7. 8. When did you begin you r employment in the Nuclel Industry?

I ft> S-(_ * /0,755 -ocon-l(__A)l,{c~ -\tp s 1~e..,. o.t-"" Wha t type of training have you received since beco ing emp l oyed in the industry? ,/f-* By whom did you receive that training? I fo-.1.Q... What is your professional background

• , i.e.-laborer, electrician, etc? 11 . What are your duties and responsibilities under your current position? , eMS~ l\(..,(r.<:.t..-

r-<...~'-4.~,,"""'~~.)

12. What were your duties and responsibilities during your tenure of employment with Tectra Tech? ruJok* *

• vJ (y I-\ 0 (N \}Jv<\, V fx_.\-\J V .

-f) .r\ 5 J-c. . orts?, if so please identify?

15. What policies and proced~res were you guide((. by? l, t.~.sc!. + l+ R.A l N 1nJ4\_ ~vt..* ( D~ CW\~ ..s~ 8-1-5 (v\o...C k ,LL (-f 16. What were your Individual requirements under the license for which your name was under? 17. What were Tectra Tech's responsibilities as a condition of the llcense? Protected Activity / Management Knowledge

18. Did you

• Tectra Tech management?

If so who, and when? (b)(l)(C) 19. What was your sa e j-C..v~L 20. Where i s your safety related concern captured procedurally?

21. How did m<jtnagement respond to you raising your safety concern? I) \ v,.) V\' oh (; ..c. ..c; 22. Wa'1cr~ition report or equivelant written regarding your concern, if so by whom? 23. Was there any documentation of your safety related concern? V1 >\) 24. Did you have the ability to document your concerns in some form or another? f\J oL-1<-,.{o.\\~ 25. Had this Issue been raised by any other Tectra Tech employees, if so what happened?

26. D id you take your conce rns to anyone,outside your employer (i:e.-the Navy), if so who, when and in what form? 'i'l~

• I.,{)~ S C~(. C;,t>J La. K_ 101 D* ((A.5 o -27. What is your understanding of Tectra Tech's company policy regard ing whistleblowing/

raising safety related concerns/

28. Does Tectra Tech operate on the principals of safety first? 1o. I ( loo\i:: 91 ~\.c-.l* ,o*v'I f 'v 6 * \1)..r 5 "--k.,-\y l.""'-P lay U_.S 29. Was it made clear to TT employees that they had the right and even responsibility to raise safety related concerns without fear of retaliation?

V\. 'l. J 30. Was any training provided by TT with respect to how to raise safety related issues and the process by which those iss ues would be addressed? . . (b)(7)(C) I , 31. Was an investigation/inquiry conducted regarding yo ur concerns and if so by whom at TT? Adverse Action Cs) 32. What do you believe was the adverse action taken against you? 33. When was this action taken? 34. Were you ever demoted or given a lesser job, prior to termination proceedings?

35. What did management provide as the reason for personnel action taken against you? 36. Did you ever receive a reduction in pay? 37. Did anyone within the TT management hierarchy ever i dentify to you either officially or unofficially that the personnel action levied against you had anything to do with you raising safety related issues? 38. What was the impa c t of you rai sing your safety concerns, on TT? . Are aware of any other employees having been retaliated against for ra ising safety concerns, if so whom? 40. Was an internal investigation gone by TT or any other entity regarding your termination?

41. Do you cu rrently have any other open complaints, i.e.-DOL or State of California?

If so Identify? 42. Do you know if TT management discussed your safety co ncerns and subsequent termination with any other employees? If so whom/ 43. Is there anything additional that you would like to add to the record at this time? w (As FlrN"\u-TT-+v1J h,~ U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Investigations Personal History Form 01 Case Number / -l::_D I 2.. -t5D::). Date of Jnterview:;=._;:~:::t::h='l:t /:: 'J=Q_====--------------l (b)(7)(C). 1 Full Name: . Current Employer: Employer Address: r x nil , r l!'l)(C> (b)(l)(C) Work Phone: Mobile Phone: Home Phone: Home Add r ess: Title/Posjtion: Length of Employment

Sex: Race: Male ,/ Female l (b)(7)(C) I (b)(7)(C) Date of Birth:_ Place of Birth: _ (blCll(C) I Email Address: _ _ i;;:,)(~))(~C)~---------------------.c===-------, Ed u cation:

EXHIBIT 1 Case No. 1-2012-002 Exhibit 1 (b)(7)(C) OFFICIAL USE ONLY 01 INVESTIGATION INFORMATION INVESTIGATION STATUS RECORD Facility: TETRA TECH EC , INC. Case Agent: l (b)(7)(C) Case Number: 1-2012-002 Date Opened: 10/07/2011 08/2012 High Docket Number(s): 03038199 ECO: Priority: Case Type: Materials/ Industrial Status: Report In Draft Primary Alleg Source: Aileger Allegation Number(s): Rl-2011-A-0019 SubjecVAllegation

DISCRIMINATION AGAINST A FORMER RADIATION SAFETY OFF I CER FOR HAVING RAISED A SAFETY CONCERN Monthly Status Report: 10/07/2011

On January 31 and February 1 , 2011, Bert BOWERS, former Tetra Tech RSO representative at the Hunter's Point Naval Shipyard decommission i ng project provided a number of technical concerns and a discrimination co mpla int In electronic mail messages to Rick MUNOZ , NRC: RIV. Because Tetra Tech is a Region I (RI) licensee, these concerns wete forwarded to the RI Office Allegat i ons Office for dispos i tion. Specifically, BOWERS alleged that he e x perienced a hostile work environment and d i scrimination after raising radiologica l concerns to I nclude the need for improved and timely communications related to radlological

• contro l s in the field at Hunte rs Po i nt. BOWERS claims to have been repeatedly berated by a Tetra Tech --~=,,.----...,.,.,.,,,,..-,---""'the last instance occurring in the presence of the Tetra or raising his concerns. BOWERS claimed that the 0 told hirnP)(7)(C) that h*'r.1s;"".s;;--;a~e:;;;

ty k,"";c:;;o:;.n;:: ce;;:;r~~-'-ed to be based on the fact that h is [BOWERS] name was l i sted on the NRC license and t hat he (b)(7)(C) uld arrange to have it removed. BOWER S c l a ims that .when he. inform er--,, S O 1gation to resolve issues at the site or begin steps to I nform the NRC , th (b)(7) :>~d him to pack up his office and to get off of the s i te immediately On April 1, 2011, w last day that BOWERS performed work for Tetra Tech , but he was paid for accumulated overt i me, s i ck and annual leave until August 1 , 20 11. These concerns were discussed during a March 16 , 201 1 , NRC: R I Allegation Review Boa rd (AR B). The ARB, to Inc lude Regional Counsel determ i ned that BOWERS had articulated a prima facle case of discr i mination and that BOWERS would be offered access to the NRC's Alternate Dispute Resolution (ADR) program or to have 01 i nvest i gate. BOWERS chose to pursue the ADR option. BOWERS and Tetra Tech mediated on August 17 , 2001 , but did not reach a settlement and the issue was returned to RI for i nvestigation. l (b)(7)(C) On Octobe r 5 , 2011 , Region I spoke with BOWERS who confirmed that ADR med i ation had fa i led and that he desired t at 01 Investigate his dis c r i mination concern. Potential V i olations I nclude 10 C FR 30.7 (Emp l oyee protection) and 10 CFR 30.10 (Deliberate misconduct). The Statute of Limitations tolls on April 1 , 2016. Status: FWP ECO (90 days): 01/2012. Complet i on Date: Total Staff Hours: 374.5 Issue Date: Months Open: 9.9 DOJ Act i on (s): DOJ Referral Date: 01 Violation(s)

Harassment and Int i midation_

No Result Statute of Limitations Date: 04/01/2016 EXHIBIT I PAGE' I 0-F ___,,__, -PAGE(S) 08/15/2012 4:32: 11 PM OFFICIAL USE ONL'l -01 IN.VESTIGATION INFOKMATION Page#1 EXHIBIT 2 Case No. 1-2012..002 Exhibit 2 C:\Documents and Settings\dly1 \Local Set tings\ Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook \KH4AVY01\20110019rcv.docx Allegation Receipt Report (Use also for Staff Suspected Wrongdping -SSW) Page 1 of 4 Date Received: 01 /31/2011, 02/01/2011, 02/02/2011 Allegation No. Rl-2011-A-0019 Received via: Emails (13) on 01/31/2011, emails (3) on 02/01/2011 , email ( 1) on 02/02/2011 , and phone ( 1) on 02/02/2011 Employee Receiving Allegation/SSW: Rick Munoz, Materials HP, RIV Source of information: licensee employee Alleger Name: Alternate Phone: Direct: Mobile *Elbert " Burt" Bowers Home Address:

• Radiation Safety Officer Representative , Tetra Tech EC Hunters Point Naval Shipyard 200 F is her Avenue San Francisco , CA 94124 City/State/Zip: Alleger's Employer: era ec C, In c. Alleger's Position/T i tle: "Site RSO Representative 1000 The American Road Morris Plains , NJ 07950 Site RSO is licensee employee ( contractor) under the RASO-approved decommissioning

• d :::r on project at Hunters Point Naval Shipyard , San Fra ncisco , CA Personal Email: l (b)(7)(C)

• D o not comple e tnes I t r issues Facility: Tetra Te c h EC Inc.at Hunters Point Docket No. or License No.: 030-38199/29-31396

-01 Naval Sh i pyard Is it a dec l aration, statement, or assertion of I mpropriety or inadequacy? Yes Is the impropriety or inadequacy associated with NRC regulated activities? Y es Is the validity of the issue unknown? Yes If NO to any of the above question s, the issue is no t an allegation and should be hand led by other appropriate methods (e.g. as a request for information , public responsiveness matter , or an OSHA re ferral). Is there a potential immediate safety significant issue that requires an Ad-Hoc ARB? (I f so, immediately i nform your management and the Allegations Office) Was alleger informed of NRC identity protection policy? If H&I was alleged, was alleger informed of DOL rights? Did they raise the issue to their management and/or ECP? Does the alleger object to having their issue(s) forwarded to the licensee? Does the alleger object to release of their identity? Paneled by RIV on 02/25 & 03/02/2011 Yes Yes Yes No No Provide alleger's verbatim response to this question: --------------------- Was confidentiality requested? Was confidentia l ity initially granted? Individual Granting Confidentiality

No N/A C:\Documents and Settings\dly1

\ Loca l Set tings\ Temporary In t ernet Files\Content.Outlook \KH4AVY01\2 0 110 0 19 r cv.do c x Page 2 of 4 Allegation/SSW Summary: (Summarize each concern -provide additional detail on next page if necessary) (1) The Tetra Tech Site Radiation Safety Officer (SRSO) at the Hunters Point Naval Shipyard decommissioning and remediation project experienced a "hosti le work environment" and ultimately discrimination after raising safety concerns and ident ifying the subsequent need for improved and timely communications related to radiological controls in the field on January 13 , 2011 in a meeting. (2) There have been a number of radiolo gica l safe ty concerns identified which are indicative of a poor radiologic safety culture in terms of management communication and management support associated with SRSO's authority. Functional Area: Decommissioning Materials Discipline For Each Concern (p lace concern no(s). in the box provided): [1 , 3] Discrimination [2 , 4 J Health Ph ysi c s [1, 2] Safety Culture [2] Training/qu alification [4] Wrongdoing [) Other* Detailed Description of AJlegation/SSW (if necessary)

(1) Th e Tetra Tech Site Radiation Safety Office r (SRSO) at the Hunters Po i nt Naval Shipyard decommissioning and remediation project experienced a w hostile work env i ronment and ultimately discrimination after raising safety concerns and identifying the subsequent need for improved and timely communication s related to radiological controls in the field on January 13 , 2011 in a meeting. <':I l (b)(?)(C) .,A~ao.ua.JO£..'.LJ....2Clll.l-..at.aJQD.1::ax.i.a;l

• ate l y 0637 hours , Site RSO met with threE'r 11 11 * (b)(?)(C) e Site RSO's office to convey the expe~c""" ta_ti.,..,._o_n_o.,,..ft ,.,..h_e_u_r-ge ...... n""" c-y_a_n_d~--nd RSOR communicat ion of any activity in or near impac t ed areas that extend beyond regu**'" a"" r~o""'u""'rs~o""""" a"""" ow~or assessment of the need for confirming the presence of an Authorized User and to convey that the same expectat i on be conveyed to the RAD field technicians;

!(b)(7 J(C l I i nterrupt the Site RSO's discussion and proceed to loudly and profanely disagrye aod state Jbrt it was the utility corridor crew the night before and that situation had been cleared; at that point!(b)(?)(C) _ appeared in the office doorway and said "You know , it seems your biggest concern has to do with your name being on the license *.... I can arrange to have it removed." On January 13, 2011. at approximately 0642 hours , the Site RSO we ffice and asked him if he realized that the Site RSO was now obligated to notify the NRC (b)(7)(C) espon ed that the Site RSO should not have allowed the situation wh i ch just occurred between the 1te and ther x 1)(c i I to have dis integrate d to such a level and the Site RSO could just go ahead and do what ffie S1te RSO thought s/he need to do and said "call the NRC or whoever but while ou're at it cu can also ack u the s t in our office and et the h I off m ro*ec ." (b)(7)(C) ere present in the conference room just outside (b)(7)(C) ffice when this occurred; at approximately 0647 , the Site RSO left the site after quickly shutting down and storing a computer and moving a box of unused dosimetry from the Site RSO's cabi ne t and placing it unde r the Site RSO's desk. On January 13, 2! ! 1 a~appmxlm:elv 0647 bap rs, t e Site RSO from an offsite over l ook of th e HPS portion of Parcel E called (b)(7)(C) I (b)(7)(C) and informed him of the s ituation i n an abbreviated fashion and calleater rom a res, ence to provide a e I ed account. After being re moved from duties at Hunters Point Naval Shipyard, the RSO was temporarily reassigned to the Alameda decommissioning project (Naval Sh i pyard) after engaging in protected activity on January 12 and 13 , 2011. After the in cident where, after nonnal working hours and after dark, Shaw Environmental work crews were discovered in two vehicles exiting a fenced off area of an impacted area (RCA and no RAD representative was present to determine whether appropriate egress protocols yvere followed , the (b)(7)(C) flew out to the site and berated the site RSO during the field supervisory staff meeting before the morning tailgate ~r iefing. EXH I BIT -L. PAGE_5.:=: 0-F _-, 5=-_-PA-GE (S) C:\Documents and Settings\dly1 \Loca l Settings \Tempo rary Internet Fi l es\Cont ent.O utlook\K H4AVY 01\20110019rcv. do cx Page 3 of 4 Note: Cl email dated 02/02/2011 to NRG RIV indicated that Cl is reporting back to Hunters Point to ~.t~~nsure on-going RAD program con trols and integrity but was informed by a HPS RAD ----..::.t h~at as of the morning of 02/02/2011 , a new posting on the RSO board i dentified""'!(b""")(?""')("""" c)---, as the (b)(7)(C) ith a backdated effective date of 01 18 , 2011 (2) There have been a number of radiological safety concerns ide ntified which are indicative of a poor radiologic safety culture in tenn s of management communication and management support associated with SRSO's authority. Construction management has demonstrated progressively eroding recognition/backing of Its NRC license and progressively eroding acknowledgement of the authority/level of respect associated with the SRSO , RSO representatives , and authorized users and hesitant willingness to allow radiation protection personnel to perform/carry out expected driven responsibilities unimpeded and without consequence

this sends the wrong message to those who perform tasks In the field. Example s provided of a poor radiologic safety culture included a reduction in the SRSO's work schedule , lack of implementation of appropriate egress protocols for egress from impacted areas , water stat ion s set up in impacted area without safety office approval, not enough time for SRSO training of workers, co ntrols inadequate to prevent vandals from stea l ing copper cab le on site , and numerous breaches of property fence/RCA perimeter boundary. On January 12, 2011 J{b ll7l{C l I informed Site RSO th at RSOR function's weekly hours were being reduced fro m 50 to 45; RSOR felt that th is reduction was specifically aimed at the RSOR function and was not an across-the organization redu ction; Site RSO questioned how to e n sure conti nue d " llcensedrlven" obligations like " end-of-shift" drive through the site for integrity checks after the field staff h as l e ft for the day , under such a new allotment of weekly hours and nine-hour days and new requirement to begin attending the 6

30 am daily me etings. On January 12, 2011 a t 1650 hour s, Site RSO performed "end-of-shift" drive through the site for integrity checks and at 1720 hours discovered field laborers In two TfE C project pi ck-up trucks exiting Parcel E RSY4 sector through the gate; Site RSO proceeded to TtEC managem~,'rlH~f'i'ecs aad d isj vered that there was no "Authorized User" on TtEC's *

• he and t hat all had left for the day; Site RSO proceeded t (b)(7)(C) ffice and informed him of the l ab orers leavin g an impacted area wh i le no " u z , (b)(7)(C) s uggested that the SO-hour work week may be needed after all. Brea ches of the RCA perimeter boundary at property fence were found du ring RAD integrit y field checks. Afte r normal working hours and after dark , Shaw Environmental work crews were dis cove red in two ve hicles exiting a fenced off area of an impacted area (RCA); the RSO was not present to determine whether appropriate egress protocols were followed.

On two occasions. a water station was set up inside an RCA without safety office approval which was contrary to procedure; on one occasion in November 2010, the RCA signs were deliberatel y turned down by someone; a water station was set up on another occasion in Parcel E in January 2011. The Site RSO was not given enough time to adequately train workers. Vandals were found on-site stealing copper cable in the impacted shore l i ne area (RCA). After January 13, 2011 , RSO office c abinet and drawers were breached. Management has been going through the SRSO's files; recor.d s required to be maintained by the NRC l icense have been compromised/left un co ntrolled and a re being de st roy ed. The alleger submitted a copy of a memorandu,µ...~.iJ.1.1:w.i..J......i..J.1.1J1.1.1,s;;;~~int Shipyard (HPS), Tetra Te ch EC (Tt EC) Events Leading up to January 13, 2011 (b)(7)(C) * *

• Representative RSOR to Pa ck Offi ceNacate roJect) to t to Tetra Tech (b)(7)(C) ated January 18 , 2011 which detailed January 12-13 , 2011. tndjyjduals

~amed P, X*)(C) (b)(i)(C) e summary o events as t EXHIBIT ____,::l. __ pr , p.r:._ _3 . OF 2L.PA.GE(S) C:\Documents and Settings\dly1 \Lo cal Se tti ngs\ Tem p ora r y Int ern et F il es\C on t en t.O u tlo o k\KH 4A VY01\20110019 r cv.do cx (b)(7)(C) I Tetra T ecn (b l (7)(C) I Contractor -~b)()XC) Contractor -Contractor -(b)(J)(C) I b)ll)(C) I (b)(7)(C) l\b X l Xq I I Tetra Tech's l (b)(7)(C) I The!(b)(l)(C) ~as contacted by telephone and memorandum dated January 18 , 201 1. Page 4 of 4 A tota l of 17 emails , some with attachments including photographs , were submitted by the Cl to NRC RIV; these emails pertained to the concerns which were raised by the Cl and the response initiated by site and corporate management. This allegation (RIV-2011-A-0021) was paneled by RIV on 02/16/11 and 02/28/11 and wa s transferred to Rl's j urisdiction via the latter panel and acknowledgemenVclosure letter dated 03/02/11 (no enclosure listing concerns was provided i n the latter letter). From Tetra Tech letter dated October 18. 2010 to NRC RI , " The potential radioisotopes of concern are primari l y Ra:226: Cs--137 , and*Sr;90; a total of less than 500 millicuries total for Ra-226 and Cs-137 is a realistic conservative estimate for total activity based on previou s survey results.** Cl email dated 02/02/2011 to NRG RIV indicated that Cl i s reporting back to Hunters Point,,..to...,.,,.re,....*

---

. establish/ensure on-going RAD program controls and integrity but was informed b a HPS fi"*> r t hat as of the morning of 02/02/2011 , a new posting on the RSO board identified (b)(7)(C) s the l (o)(l)(C)

I l (b)(7)(C) r ith a backdated effective date of 01 18 , 2011 G:\ora\alleg\pa n el\20110019a r b1 .docx ALLEGATION REVIEW BOARD DISPOSIT I ON RECORD ARB MINUTES ARE REVI E W E D AND APPROVED BY THE ARB CHAIR AHeg atl o n No.: R l-2011-A-0019 Site/Facility: Tetra T ech EC, Inc. ARB Date: March 1 6, 2011 Concern(s) D i sc u ssed: Branch Chief (AOC): Joustra A c knowledg e d: Yes Con f iden t i a lity G r anted: No D I SCRIM I NATION CO N C E RN: The co n cerned individual {Cl) expe r ie n ced a "hostile work environment" when ra i sing safety concerns and addressing subseq u ent n eed for improved and t i mely commu n icat i ons r elated to radiolo g ical co n tr o ls in the field at H u nters Point Naval Shipyard. Examptes~ i (b)(7)(C) I

• T hef l:;tated to the Cl that his safety concerns seem to be based on the fact that h is name is on the l ice n se , the l (b)(7)(C) ji nformed the Cl that he can arrange to have the Cl's name removed. * *
• The!(b)(7)(C) I informed t he C l to pack his office and leave the s i te. SAFETY CONCERNS: 1. Radio l ogical Controlled A r ea signs were turned down (i.e., not visib l e) in areas that requi r ed the sign-age. 2. A water station was setup i n side the RCA without fo ll owing proper protocol.

3. Vehicles l eaving the RCA after normal working hours may not have followed the proper procedures for egress. 4. On 1/12/2011 , work was being done past 4 P M and there may not have been an Authorized User prese n t to oversee this decommissioning work. 5. Cl identified

~A;~!:::::1~9 conditions at t h e H u n ters Point site. 6. Cl info r med r 1m(c! ~j~bo u t an inadeq u ate s u rvey of a locker.(i n teriorwas n ot wipe tested). 7. Cl state d th r I citation safety records may be comprom i sed and/or destroyed because he kept t hese records under lock and key i n his office at the site, but when he returned to the site on 1/23/2011 , he noticed t hat t he locks were broken and/or removed and the records were accessible.

8. After being removed from site, the Cl's telephone nu m bers r emained on the emergency/off-hours contact list. Adverse Actions: r (7)(C)

• The Cl was berated by the during a field supervisory staff meeting
• The Cl was removed f r om,s d uties a t unter's Point and re-assigned to ano t he r site. Do e s a ll e ge r ob j e ct to p r o vi d in g co n c erns t o th e li c e nsee via a n RFI? N/A ALLEGATION REVIEW BOARD ATT E NDEES Acting Branch C hi ef: Ham m ann SAC: U rb a n Ch~on 0 1:~ RI Co u ns e l: Farrar O t he rs: Mas n yk-B ailey , McFadden, Nicholson DISPOSITION ACTIONS 1. Regional Counsel has determined that a prima facie case exists. Responsible Per s on: Farrar C l osu r e Documentation

EXHIBIT ~.GE __ ~-O-F ....... 5-_-PA-GE(S} E CO: Completed: 3/16/2011 G:\ora\alleg\panel\20110019arb1 .docx 2. Send status l etter to alleger providing enclosure.

Provide ADR and DOL rights. Responsible Person: SAC Closure Documentation: ECO: 3/23/2011 Completed:

3. DNMS to conduct inspection at Hunter's Point to address the e i ght (8) safety concerns (last week of March 2011 ). Responsible Person: Joustra/Orysia Masnyk-Bailey Closure Documentation:

ECO: 4/29/2011 Completed:

4. Repanel, if necessary (based on inspection findings to determine if chilling effect letter is needed or if add'I 01 assistance is needed); Otherwise provide draft closeout letter to SAC for safety concerns; if _possible provide status of discrimination concern. Re~ponsible Person: SAC Closure Documentation:

ECO: 5/30/2011 Completed: SAFETY CONCERN: Discrimination for raising safety concerns -may result in chilling environment PRIORITY OF 01 INVESTIGATION: High RATIONALE USED TO DEFER 01 DISCRIMINATION CASE: ENFORCEMENT STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS CONSIDERATION: (Only applies to wrongdoing & discrimination issues that are under investigation by 01/DOUDOJ) What is the potential violat i on and regulatory requirement? 10 CFR 30.10 When did the potential violation occur? January 2011 timeframe NOTES: DISTRIBUTION: Panel Attendees , Regional Counsel, 01 , Responsible Persons EXHIBIT :;;-c;?AGE __ u, __ OF . __ \ __ PAGE(S) G:\ora\alleg\panel\20110019arb2 .do cx ALLEGATION REVIEW BOARD DISPOSITION RECORD ARB MINUTES ARE REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY THE ARB CHAIR Allegation No.: Rl-2011-A-0019 Site/Facility: Tetra Tech EC, Inc. ARB Date: May 25, 2011 Concern(s) Discussed: 1 . Review of additional info rmat ion provided by alleger on 04/26/2011 in 3 ring binder . Branch Chief (AOC): Joustra Acknowledged: Yes Confidentiality Granted: No Security Category: N/A Page 1 of 2 No specific addit i onal concern was identified after reviewing the additional information provided by the alleger. There is a generalized concern about the adequacy of the radiological control program but no new specific exa mp les are provided. Does alleger object to providing concerns to the licensee via an RFI? [N/A J ALLEGATION REVIEW BOARD AlTENDEES Chair: Lorson Branch Chief: Joustra SAC: Urban Others: Masnyk-Bailey , McFadden , Ni c holson , Dwyer , Seeley r b M l l(C) 01: "----' RI Counsel: DISPOSITION METHOD (See Attached RFI Worksheet , If A pp licable) NIA __ _ RF I __ _ Inspe ct ion or Investigation Both DISPOSITION ACTIONS 1. Send status l etter to alleger pro v iding enclos ur e closing all previous co ncerns 1 throug h 8 in attached notes reviewed during Inspection and conditionally closing the additional generalized non-sp ec ifi c concern. DNMS did provide enclosure to SAC on 05/16/2011 Responsible Person: Joustra Closure Documentation: ECO: 5/3 1/2011 Completed:

2. Based on inspection results do not recommend a chilling effect letter at thi s time, however if H&I is identified we will need to repanel. Responsible Person: Joustra Closure Documentation

SAFETY CONCERN: PRIORITY OF 01 INVESTIGATION:

RATIONALE USED TO DEFER 01 DISCRIMINATION CASE: ENFORCEMENT STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS CONSIDERATION: ECD: TBD Completed: (Only applies to wrongdoing & discrimination issues that are under investigation by 01/DOUDOJ) What is the potential violation and regulatory requirement? When did the potential violation occur? EXHIBIT __ J __ _ PAGE-+. OF --~-_P AGE(S} Page 2 of2 NOTES: This is the second set of concerns from the same Cl on the same allegation regarding working conditions at Hunter's point, CA. The first set of concerns was discussed at the ARB held on Mar<;;h 16 , 2011. The concerns discussed at that time were: 1. Radiological Controlled Area signs were turned down (i.e., not visible) in areas that required the signage. 2. A water station was setup inside the RCA without following proper protocol.

3. Vehicles leaving the RCA after normal working hours may not have followed the proper procedures for egress. 4. On 1/12/2011, work was being done past 4PM and there may not have been an Authorized User present to oversee this decommissioning work. 5. Cl identified fence breach conditions at the Hunters Point site. 6. Cl informed!(b)(7)(C) !about an Inadequate survey of a locker (interior was not wipe tested). 7. Cl stated that required radiation safety records may be compromised and/or d est royed because he kept these records under lock and key in his office at the site, but when he returned to the site on 1/23/2011 , he noticed that the locks were broken and/or removed and the records were accessible. 8. After being removed from site , the Cl's telephone numbers remained on the emergency/off-hours contact list. Generalized concern from additional information provided by alleger on 04/26/2011 as follows: Inadequate end-of-day RAD integrity field checks by supervisors.

Tetra Tech states in their written procedures supervisors are to walk around the restricted area(s) at the end of each work day to ensure all barrier s and controls (including but not limited to, signs , postings, locks, chains , gates, etc ... ) are established to discourage/deter unauthorized access after routine working hours. The concerned individual (Cl) alleges procedures were not being followed by field supervisors at th~ end of the day in conducting adequate field checks. There is an ongoing discrimination iss ue. DISTRIBUTION: Panel Attendees, Regional Counsel, 01, Responsible Persons EXHIBIT :).... PAGE_L OF ~--PAGE(S) C:\Doc umen t s a nd S e tti n g s\dlyl\Loc al Setti n gs\Tempora ry Internet F iles\Co n tent.Out l ook\KH4AVY0 1\20110019 a rb3 (2) .docx ALLEGATION REVIEW BOARD DISPOSITION RECORD ARB MINUTES ARE REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY THE ARB CHAIR Allegation No.: R l-2011-A-0019 Site/Facility: Hunt ers Po i n t-T et r a T ech ARB Date: F eb rua ry 1 , 20 1 2 Branch Chief (AOC): Fe r das Acknowledged

Yes Confidentiality Granted: N o Issue d i scussed: R eview of 01 tr anscrip t (01 Case N o. 1-2012-002) fro m interview wi th Cl to determine if any n ew co n cerns were i de n ti fi ed. Does alleger object to RFI to the license&? N/A A L LEGATION REVIEW BOARD ATTENDEES D)( l( l Chair: Dlorson Branch Chief: M. Ro b erts SAC: RU rban 01: RI Couns e l: K F arrar Others: H a m ma n n/N ic h o l so n , J. Mc F a dd en, D. H olody, A. Tu rilin DISPOSITION METHOD (See Attached RFI Worksheet} I n s p ect ion/T ec hn ica l R eview DISPOSITION

.ACTIONS (Lis t ac t ions fo r p r ocessing and clos u re. Note res p o n sible person(s), form of action c l os u re document (s), and es t i m ated co m pletion d ates.) 1) No n ew concerns were i de n t i fied. 0 1 Case i s sti ll open. Respons i ble Person: F e rd as Closure Documentat i on: A RB Fo r m 2) Cont i nue 0 1 In vest i gat ion 1-2012-002. l (b)(7)(C) Responsible Person: ,_ __ ....., Closure Documentation

SAFETY CONCERN: see p r evious panel fonn PRIORITY OF 01 INVESTIGATION:

see previou s panel fonn ECO: 2/1/12 Completed: 2/1/1 2 ECO: 3/3 0/2012 Completed: RATIONALE USED TO DEFER 01 DISCRIMINATION CASE: s e e pr ev i o u s panel fo rm ENFORCEMENT STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS CONSIDERAT I ON: s e e pr evio u s p anel form NOTES: T he C l's o ri g i nal co n ce rn s i n c lud ed w r o n g ful te rm i n atio n. 01 co n d u cted a n i n terv i ew w it h t h e C l and DNM S 8 4 perfo r med a rev i ew of t h e 01 t r a n sc ri pt to d e t e rm i ne if a n y n e w co n ce rn s we r e id ent i fied. DISTRIBUTION

Panel A tte nd ees , R eg i o n a l Co un s el , 01, Re spons i b l e Per sons EXHIBIT 3 Case No. 1-2012-002 Exhibit 3 (b)(7)(C) .~ ~-\ (b)(7)(C) I +-l t Statement of Events In the Vicinity of Bert Bowers' Office , 011 January 13, 2011 1. What is the issue of concern that Bert Bowers conununicated to the HP I Supervisors, as you undentood it? The-.. d<. -t='\ l \ Q. \ c!:> rt.~ S\' RJ.., DI/er +i m.e.. Wo.5 b{~ W0>r\<e.A

+he. nt~~-\ o+ , ... 13~'2.ol\.

2. Did you agree with Mr. Bowers' stated issue of concem. Why or why not? No. Tne. AreA. c!) 4-h.e.. b~+\ ,\ <!>f\. c::.i-~s~

~. hc:....s ~~so Ct>T\ ~w-renc.e. r \ w A.:tt I ltl. T\-J b Are.o... rwt-~S\ed. \.\e.. !>-\.~\e.J. we. neo.d.eJ ~\~+or~ c.one-urrence o.rtA we. c\.lJ t¥>.\-\-i.oJJe. i -\-. "'l !Q 2 O 1 2 0 0 2 '"' ,...~ .. 3 EXHIBIT r.e(S) ?AGE_}__ OF _2:_PA~ 3.. As d e ta i l e d a s possi ble , provide t h e se q u e nce of events t h a t you pe 1*so n al l y wi t n esse d from th e tim e th at Mr. B owers i n it i ate d a mee t i n g of t h e HP S u pe r visors un t il h e l eft th e s i te that morn in g. ' \~\ E.ve.rd--Be.r\. Q,~~ -\--o CP~ +o h~ $ l (b)(7)(C) I O.f'+\c.~ (01o~O). ~nd. Even+ .. \,er+ le.+-"'-S Kn.ol4.> f\.\4t.:\- on .\,~ rz.H~ <O-t '3"°"" , ~r~r5 ~n ~r'eA (w>..111.a C.r\~\>~*) J.: J not ~~~.\-e':) D!>n C.'-"-rr e.C\c.e... 3rd. ~\ten.\:-Ste.lfe. \e:\* Bert 'Kno'-'.) 4-h4.\ n.e. wet.S no-\-c::eirre.t: .. + +h-4,+ we. 1-v>..d. RP\~D C..01"\c.urre.n.ce.. 4~ E\/ent (bJ(l)(C) 4.\~o \c:.\-~w th.~+ \-\e w~ m'is--k.~ei\ 4-h~A-~\\ "~ wt.. \~ (-r\'~t Ra. WC...!> LleA.n. C.ol'\~~;on.. o..: c\ nt>t l"\(:AA. 5 I./, -t o t e f~5er,.\-+h.e. T e.+rci.. T e.G:.h. \k.e.l"\:'.Se., 5+r1 E \CS\* (bl(ll(C) ca,..rn.e. n o..nJ \e.t E>e,-+ Kno'-' ~a.. t-h.e ~6 +~ one Wl-\.o }kor~-z.ed t"'-e. <:!>Vc!r+\rne +c,, +, l\ on. ~-o..rt~ t\AA.+ t + ~C'1 c.on.s-h-t..l<=*-~e\\. t..,~ E."eci~ -\e,\-!(bJ(7)(Cl ! *Know ~t 'n.e... W4.~ no~ ~rr\~,.mecl -th.a...+ we... ~\n.S, h e!-\ n.~ ......._2:) u)c21t-\(, I :b)(7)(C) 1-+"'-Evllt+--_s~v!~ ~~ea .:,u~ c+ tS~,+.s c!l-\+t C-e. ~4-+o h.~.s ei+~tce.. ._____, g*H--. tven~ ~(b)(7J(C) I wo.\\c'.d.

• ~\(_ ,n+o oHt~ \e.t-h~rn Knou.!) , + he. ~e,'-1.\t:l..

~o +\l\.e Ar'\ "r-~t-\.. rrteet-,nc::t5 he-~~\o{ ho..ve.. s~ \/~s ~oh. "...) E.\lef"'l\- .-Berf u.lent , n~o l (b)(?)(C) l ot:+:~ c.e. ~\fe...e.... "e..r~J re.S ,~n"4-~o h °'-nA J. --\-t...o..\ he. ~!:> ~\rt~ CA. l \ .,-k ~L . 'O~-f;.vc.rt.\--I \e..Ft +t>, tk At"\.. -:54e.~ m~~+t~ EXHlSlT 3 PAG E /h O F ~.PAGE(S) EXHIBIT 4 Case No. 1-2012..002 Exhibit4 Date: To: From: May 12, 2011 r)(7)(C) [ I t] TEIRA TECH FW INC Memorandum RE: Future Assignment of Bert Bowers to HPS fu January 2011, you and l released Bert Bower s from the Hunters Point Shipyard (HPS) project *as a result of an outburst that occurred between Bert Bowers , the Radfological Supervisors , and the l (b X,J(C) I Thi s outburst stx:mmed from Bert not know~r a work area had been down posted and~oved for backfill, and Bert's need to go th (b)(7) to ask the statu s of the work area. Tue~ked Bert to attend th e next morning me g with the Radiological Supervisors to discuss 1t. The outburst occurred shortly after this morning meeting ended. Bert had informed us that he felt threatened at HPS, was uncomfortable being on site , and that he was concerned about a "culture of safety" that he felt jeopardized our NRC licen s e. We agreed to assign Bert to Alameda, where an additional RSOR level person was needed during the 24/7 dredging operations occurring at Alameda , knowing this was a short tenn assignment at Alameda. We informed Bert that we wou ld conduct a thorough investigation, and upon completion, }et him know the outcome and our decision. With re gards to Bert's feeling 1hreatened ,!(b)(?)(C) !apologized to him for the outburst and mi s understanding between the two of them , and Bert accepted that apology. We discu~'s discomfort at the site with him on severa l occasions in January, and after receiving XCJ apology , I w~ under the impression that Bert's concerns were reduced. However , our investigation indicated there was definitely a lack of trust and confidence in Bert by bot!} the!(b)(l)(C) land the Radiological Supervisors. This is concerning, since that lack of teamwork and trust will significantly limit Bert's effectiveness in the RSOR position. You and I interviewed the Radiological Supervisors at the si t e , *and learned that they were all aware that the area in question by Bert had clearly been down posted. They all pointed to the daily 6:30 AM momingplanning meeting and status board as the sources of information for areas that were down posted. I find it concerning that an RSOR lac mplete knowledge of areas that are posted or down posted, and that an RSOR is going to th /~t o find out this information. The RSOR is there to support o~and should be keeping i~f) ormed, not the other way around. 1 2 0 1 2 ~. 0 0 2 EXHIBIT ___:.L\_ PAGE_L OF _ _k._.P A GE(S) Bert made several allegations about work at HPS being non-compliant with our NRC license, and repeatedly expressed concerns that work was not being conducted appropriately. However, when questioned and during our site tour, Bert was never able to point to any specific item that was non-compliant. You led a detailed investigation into our NRC license compliance at HPS, and identified multiple findings. All nine findings were a direct result of Bert not performing his RSOR functions.

• You then requested that the NRC accelerate their planned inspection schedule at HPS. The NRC conducted an audit with you in Virginia for overall license compliance and an audit in April at the HPS site. Toe only finding from this audit was a non-citation finding rel~ted to Bert leaving a radiation so urce unattended in a conference room following a training session. During our conference call with Bert this afternoon, he admitted that he left this source on the conference room, and that his action was improper.

Your in vestigation and that of the NRC revealed serious deficiencies in Bert's performance while serv~g as the RSOR at HPS. Our discussions with site personnel also revealed s iga.ificant deficiencies in Bert's supervisory style. With your approval, 1 r ecommend that Bert not b e returned to HPS as the RSOR, or any other proje ct site as an RSOR. I -recommend you provide very specific guidance and direction to Bert that will focus on impro v ing his performance. I also recommend that you on l y ass ign him to non-RSOR positions until you see demonstrated impro vements in his performance. We sho uld continue to look for non-RSOR o pp ortunities where Bert can further develop. You assigned !(b)(7)(C) !as the !(b)(l)(C) !during this time period. , (b l(: (:) ~as instrumental in helping address the fi nding s you identified in your investigation , comp e mg the 20 10 T LD summary, completin training of Radiological Supervisor s, a nd providing support during the NRC inspection. (b)(?)(C) was also instrumental in addressing a surprise inspection by OSHA related to an anonymous complaint about lack of radio logical trainin and records that resulted in no OSHA citation. With your approval, l recommend assigning (b)(l)(C) a s the long-tenn (b)(7)(C) for our HPS work. 1~)17XCI Approved: ___ ... -------------- -=!.-------------, l (b)(7)(C) .... l (b-)(7-)(-C) ______ __,~etra Tech EC 2 EXH1BIT ~L\ __ PM,E_2 OF -z:_ .?AGE(S) EXHIBIT 5 Case No. 1-2012-002 Exhibit 5 I -~ TO: TETRA TECH EC, fNC. Bert EE#: 519950 lntem11I Memorandum February 1, 2011 LOCATION: Six Mile, SC FROM: Human Resources LOCATION: Morris Plains, NJ

SUBJECT:

Tempora ry Assignment to Radlologlcal EMAC Pro j ects at Fonner NAS Alameda In Alameda , Callfornla This letter wHI confirm your temporary assignment to the NAVFAC SW RadloJogicaJ EMAC CTOs 3 , 5 , and 6 effective January 25, 2011. Your assignment Is expected to last through March 15, 2011. At the end of your assignment or completion of the project, whichever comes first, the provisions of this letter will no longer apply. Please be advised that this temporary assignment may have an effect on your medical benefits if you are currently enrolled In an HMO. To find out what changes, if any, wtll Impact you , please caJI your Human Resources Representative. You can discuss what options will be available for you at your new location. Because you are in the same geograph,cal area and your aaslgnment haa been ongoing for a period exceeding 12 months, all expeneN associated wtth your aaalgnment aa deflr:,ed In thla letter will be considered taxable Income and .wm be subject to all withholding. A. " TAXES Your tax withholdings may change as a result of this assignment. An employee's state of residency and taxation may be affected by various factors, including a change in assignment from temporary to indefinite. Therefore, State Tax Regulations require TtEC to review the state tax laws for the state in which you work and the state in which you have residency, i.e. your home address of record with 1he company and to withhold/report accordingty. It is the employee's responsibility to'file the necessary tax forms required In the state where he/she works, resides, or both. You may wish to consult a tax accountant in order to determine how this will affect you. E><HIBIT s PAGE I 0-F--..:s=-PA-:.-GE(S) ,,a ,i.,. Bert Bowers February 1, 2011 Page2 a. LODGING and PER DIEM Commencing October 29, 2010 you will receive an all inclusive Per Diem (meats and incidentals) of $61 per calendar day. You will also be reimbursed tor actual lodging costs not to exceed $89 per calendar day. Lodging in excess of $89/day, including all taxes, will be at your own expense. This per d i em will be paid through the completion of your assignment. Reimbursement for lodging wUI be based on actual expenses. R~celpts are required tor all expenditures. The employee will make arrangements to stay at a lodging location of his/her choice as long as the lodging expenses are within 1he above guidelines. As an alternative, you may request that the company establish a Purchase Order for lodging , which wlll be paid directly .by the company. You will .be responsible for signing any lease or hotel agreements. You will also be responsible for any damage you cause. Some facilities In the area may have a lower negotiated rate with TIEC that the employee can take advantage of If he or sh~ desires to stay at one of these faclllties. In no event will expenses above the current per diem rate tor lodging be reimbursed. Per Diem does not apply if you are on leave of absence (with the exception of medical leave) or are granted days .off without pay. Per Diem Is reduced to 75% ($45.75) of the meals and ll'lcidental e)_CJ)enses rate on travel days t o and from the site. Per Diem is not allowed when you are on home rotations {see below), vacation , or other non-work related activities. If you make a business trip to a home office , meetings, or other work related a~tMties. you will be reimbursed for the trip in accordance with our CAL procedure for travel and expenses. c. HOME ROTATIONS The lowest available roundtrlp airfare ticket {not to exceed coach) wlll be .provided for the purpose of home visitation once per month. Alternate means of transportation for home visitation, i.e., personal car, train , bus etc., are subject to approval of your Department Manager and the Project Manager. Such visits *should be coordinated with the Project Team and your Project Manager. Travel time Js not chargeable against the project. If an alternate means of transportation Js utilized, reimbursement will be made for actual transportation expenses tor bus or train tares , or-the established mileage rate for personal car. The costs of attemate means of transportation should not exceed 1hat cost of the lowest available airfare for the intended day of travel (not to exceed coach) and receipts are required tot reimbursement, i.e ** bus ticket, train ticket etc , (with the exception bf travel by personal car). Additionally, actual and reasonable costs up to $50.00 will be reimbursed on each home visit to assist the employee with ground transportation. The $50.00 reimbursement does not apply when using your personal vehicle as transportation for your home visit. E)(HIErr _S>_--= PAGE-2:... OF _s:=_?AG E(S_; Bert Bowers February 1, 2011 Page3 O. MOVING OF HOUSEHOLD GOODS It at the end of the assignment you are not assigned to another project under the tenns o1 a new assignment letter, you.will be authorized a one-way retum shipment by commerciaJ mover of 2,000 pounds of household goods and personal effects from your current location to your *home. This Includes packing. crating, unpacking and 1he actual cost of all ris k insurance by commercial mover. You should contact your *Human Resources Representative to discuss arrangements for moving your personal effects. Additional poundage over the above stated limit will be charged to you. E. MISCELLANEOUS By accepting 1his assignment, you also agree to work 1he project hour.5 established at your assigned looation,*whlch are expected to be Monday through Friday, 45 hours per week. It Is recognized that circumstances may arise 1hat will require 1hat you work additional hours. If so , compensation will nQt be made for work hours exceeding 45 hours per week unless approved in advance by the Project Manager. Expense Account Fonns should be submitted by at least the end of each week or whatever i s customary at your assigned location. All other reimbursements {i.e., Per Diem) wfll be honored following the incurrence. Your Project Manager will provide the charge codes that will be applicable to your wages and expenses. The applicable charge numbers are expected to vary during the course of your assJgnmentbased c;m CTO and task. Please feel free to cohtact your Human Resources Representative if you require additional Information or have questions concerning any of the above. We would like to take this opportunity to wish you much success on your new assignment This letter is a statement o1 the Intentions and policies of the company as they relate to your assignment. It should not be considered by you as a contract nor as a commitment to maintain you at the assigned location for any particular duration. This letter Is subject to modtflcatlon I n the event of changes In 1he business needs of the company or its clients. However , it cannot be modified or amended without the prior written authorization of your Department Head/Project Manager and the Morris Plains, NJ Human Resources Department. F. ENVIRONMENTAL SAFETY AND Q UALITY At TIEC we have a strong commitment to Health & Safety as demonstrated In our communications, pollcles, proc<<Jures and project record. You haw a part In the suet:e1111 of our program. You have the responsibility to work In a safe, healthful, and compl/11nt manner. All employees are required to report-all Incidents to their (9 supervisor , no matter how minor, lncludlng: EXHiSIT 5 ?AGE __ ~--. O-F__,5,....,.--PA-,GE(S) Bert Bowers February 1 , 2011 Page4

• unt1t1fe work pn,ctlc:es or condltlona
• sny work-related Injury or IUnea,
• property or vehicle damage lnclde~ and
• spll,. or mlea8tlll; Prior to your 11,rtval on .site, you must provide the 1ollowlng document*

to the Sit* Safety 'Reprnentatlw:

1. ~hr HAZWOPER Training Certificate

2. Current 8-hr HAZWOPER Refre*her Training Certfflcate (tf 40-hr certificate Is greater than 1 yur old) 3, Current phyaical approving work on a Hazardous Wa8t8 alte 4. Coples of other training certtflcatea approprlate

• to the work, *uch as: DOT HM-128F, Wast. Management, Losa Control Leaderahlp, Defeneive Driving, OSHA 10-hr ConlltrUctton Safety, OSHA 30-hr Construction Safety , etc ... You will not be reimbursed tor trawl or allowed to start charging the prolet:t until copln of thn§ document, '"' p rovided. In addition , all employees have a responsibility to make suggestions o r raise concerns to their supervisor or to Env i ronmental Safety and Quality (ESQ) personnel to help i mprove the effectiveness of our program.

, .. Bert Bowers February 1, 2011 Page5 (b)(7)(C) 1 1,~n1c 1 ~I ~-Employee (b)(l)(C) cc: AP Payroll 7 .. )-..,/'l..o I l Date z/J/(1 Date February 1, 2011 Date EXHlfl1T 5 PAGES_ OF __ :;?. __ P A GE(S} EXHIBIT 6 Case No. 1-2012-002 Exhibit 6 ' r , .. ,* *** [-n:) TETRA TECH FULL TIME TETRA: TECH-EC,IHC., PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL FORM Employee Name : Bowers, Elbert Employee Number: 626099 Period Frcm: 3131/08 Parl9d*To: 10/31/09 PURPOSE: To enhance e~yea performance and development byserilfng" o vehicle lo: (e) Estebllsh and Communicate the perfo,m1111Ce e,cpectallona of an employ.a; {b) OlacuS11.end-documenl performance In ntlrion to prevlolllly establllhed perfomnince goals a,Jd atandarda; end. (c) ldenti_ty ~* employee'* ,t,englhs and a,eea for lrnprovement

• end u,esa the empjoyeei1 perfomsance. Bowers, Elbert FREQUENCY: Perlorm.nce teedbac:11 ahould be p,owded. lo eeeh employee on a n ongoing bnlL Perfonnanca should be formally dllcuned and documianted on en IMUal bealll a a minimum. For dnlgoatad managament
• level employHa wno.e goals ore closely tied lo lh* Company's 8MUal goals, t he petfOffl'lence appraisal wit be CDmpletad on a ~rrdar yur basis. For lhoaa amJlk)ye*

not me.ellng )>ertonnance expecllllona, a docl.lm9nled appralslll tlfld dlseusslon ehoukl occu, more fmiuantly. PREPARATION

The followin9 llems should be adc"9Hed In p,eperlng the parfomlence

-apprelsal fonn. . SollcJl Inpu t of other p,oject, molrbr and client parllOl'lnel In a ,DD5illon lo know how Iha amplO)'N h11 pertonned for the period . . Review the emp l oyee's prograsa toward the ac:c:ompli8hm*n t ol provlou1ty eeatgned 90els and how Iha employee has met defined role reGponsibillllell . . Con1ider all performance. ca te gories to detenn l na which have most cont.r1buted lo l he-employea.'a eccompll1hllleflts(alrenglhs) end which have been the . Consider tu1ure goale and role r96PonaibUIII .. for the next performance period. . Provide Iha employae with lh* ~mployee , P~r11tlon for Petformanc:e Appralsar lnalrucllon lthee11or hlslher preparetion for Iha pr-. , Review and dlSCUBS the appraisal with Iha epprelsefs aupe,vtaor prior to meeting wtih tho employee. Communicate Iha raUng 1cale and the dncrtpUon of each ratJng to yaur employee before lnltlallng the parlormance llf)Pralaol meoUng. GOAL ACHIEVEMENT

Review end documen* perlonnance against the goals/role e,iper;tatlons HI for the previous poriod. A statement or col)y of prior year goal must ba inciuded. Explain In detail where performance either exceeded or did not meet goal/role eicpectallona and rate. each goal accomphhmenl RATING SCALE AND DESCRIPTION:

1

• Outstanding:

Employee hu clearly and conalstenlly parlomied outstanding accompllshmanta In this 81'98 which exceed axpecteUons. Award ol lhls rating requiru en exam~* Within the context ot Iha parlormanca appraisal 2

• Exceeds Expecl8Uons:

Employee's perl'onnanca ofton sull)88seslelCCeeds aJCpaeteUons for Iha roles and respons1111nuas assigned to the employee. Taira Tech EC.Inc. Proprietary lntotmallon 1 , I Bowera , Elbert 3

• Meew Expectations:

Employee performs Ill a leve l which Is expected for the podion and conalstem l y meets the role end responsibilities esslgned lo Iha employee. 4. Below Ex p ect!!!l!!!!( Needs Improvement)

Employ.a performance In this 11n111 ls nol conslslffltly meeting expedal!Dn$

lo, the role and rasponslbllllet aalgned to the employee. Al 11111H !he employee may mNt the expectations, however ,the employee doea nal conalstendy perform at the level required. The employee ,.qu1,es further de\lelopment In 1hla area to meet the current role raquifemenll. 5

• Unsatisfacto ry Performance

Empk)yff perfonnance la rarely meet..g the expectations for the mle *lid responalbllltlea aaalgned lo 1he employee. The employee requlraa a performance Improvement plan and perfonnance Improvement goala, In lhla aree. Award of this rallnQ requl,e1 an example o1 the noted pe,fonnllln<*

short/al. We 1111:emmend a performence lmprov*ment plan. f>ERFOftMANCE CATEGOR I ES: Rate Net\ Performance c11ego,y Wllll f60'1td to how k did or did not c:onlribul9 lo meatlng goal and Jar role requlrem1t11la.(Nole provided rating acala.~ Every cetago,y will not neceHllrily epply ta each emplo¥ae, end eccordlngly ,

• cat*gary not hied may be added for an employ** In ptoVlded.

OVERALL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION

The Overal pedonnance eYelUation

• ec:11on 1, far Iha apprelHr to wnta a alalemant that reflect. hblher Ollenl) aNeNment ol the e1119loyea'1 pllfformance for the period. THERE IS NO OVERALL PERFORMANCE RATING. lalues lo be GOmldlfed In preparing Ha statement era:
• Goal and role accomplahmenl
• Parformanea probl""', wamln91 end Ume fnlma* to lmprova * . Slr9nglh1 and areas for poaltlonfresponslbillty growth.
• Development plans to be nlab!WI In goell Mdlon. Expt.natlon c:J eny *g~ raling AHO any"1" raUng * . Suparvllor laval ot ..U.l*cllon with employee perfonminn. NEW GOALS: Establish goals far th, next performance period; flnalt.ration ol lheH 90818 requlrea Input end dlscuulon with the applllaer'a aupervlaor and wiU, lhe employee. For new employee, , goals should be developed and documented wilh the thraa months of hire dale. StGNA TURES: The apl)llliHr and ei, appralael's supervisor must *lgn end date Iha comp le tad eppralsal after the d!Kulafon with th* emptoyaa hn occwred. The amployn muat algn and data the lonn Indicating only that the dllcusslon has ocamed. EmployN comments about lh, appralaal

-optional. COPIES: AR employees ~uld be given a copy of !heir new goala, and If they wish , a copy at the signad appniilal form. Tetni Tech EC , lnc. Proprietary lnformatlan 2

• ' Bowers, Elbert From: 3131,08 To: 10/31/09 State or attach a copy of the goals and /or role requirements established for the employee since the last formal performance review. Review and Indicate progress made toward achieving each of the goals and rate each goal(1-outstanding, 2-exceea expectations 3-meets expectations, 4-below expectatlMs , 5-unsatisfactory performance). Make sure description Indicates which of the attached goals Is referenced. Add sheets where required. Telra Tech EC,lm;. Prop,fetary lnlormellon 3 mpr to PAGE-3-OF J2.._PAGE(S)

. , 8owets, Elber1 Rate each listed performance category, and any you add, as foDows: (1) Oulstand l ng,(2) Exceeds Expectations !3) Meet Expectations, (4) Below Expectatlons(needs Improvement) (5) Unsatisfactory Performance. Rating of either a *1 or *5* . addltlo I d tatlon reauirn na ocumen QuaD IY. Produce.*-'* comd.al and UHNI wo,i(. 3 Quant IV* Pnxlueea the ldMne ol work needed. 2 Com._.__...* Has the skill lru*l a. and knCJWledoe renuilad lot th* oolilton. 3 Compllanc.

• Adherea, lmplarn1111t, *enc:OURges.

fadillltee and enwonmema~ gOllemmental end ottler oomplat,ce ~-and rea.tlrements. 2 EHS

• Meeta, M!fotcet end-~nc:a with ~~4 1 c1 1an1 aaf~erMnt end pollullon end loM prevention goall , end adher* ID con,orele Envlroomenlal na-nt 8 MS and EHS and -3 I nitiative*

Ylt'lllln olv n1um* reaoawlbll tv end Is~ lor D41ffl)rmanc;e. 2 Veraadllv

• HandJea a wrt.tv ol , .. ........ib ll tlea 111\d edenlti IO,,_ end dltterent e...in.v.-ts wlll!out dllllcul!v. 2 lnnavatlon.

o.....io m or1......i or uni,,.,. Idella mefloda and aoiutlons to dlfflc:ult .....,1119ma and duatlore. 3 Ralleblll tv* Meelll lob raaulraments auch es dUe delN eul"""'*'* llltendance end ..... e1, .. -. 3 Communlc:ellon

• Benda elfec:IIYe wibal and written /l'MISH9411, gives and reee1Y11s feedbeck, 1nd llslent IO Olhen In e -v that promotea wotldno rellllllrllhl oa. 2 Ta-l'k/Coop9nltlon
• woridng relallonehlpa With lndilllduals and 9IO'IP' IUCh lhet they wllllngly lnlaiad wllh him/her 3 and nwet , e,...all for work and . Cli ent SaUelacllon
• NegollatH and meela reuoneble axtemel end Internet ctlent requ .. t encl *tabllehe, postillYe bu11n-relallanshlpa f or current and fu11n ***a, unenta. 3 Plann
• Plena oraanizas and man-all p haa. ol _, IQ IW'nll'lla m_.,.. own tlm9 etr.cclve lv. 3 Leederahfi
• Accoinpftlltl

.. perfarmanca expectation* wllh and through cowo,kera a,d IUbordlnMN In a Wfl'/ that employs direct~ aat~o. In uence. dll o oatlon end emolo vH daValoomenL 3 Ekldgal/ContlOI

• AcconlpllhN goals wtltt. o,,e,,atlng within budgetary c:onattalnll and melnlalnfng the epptoprta1,a level of contact and folc,w.up to aNU,e aca,m-"--~-~ 3 Equal Employment Cll)por1unhy
• 8vpporta company pollc:IN, fair employment pracllcas ud l;qual Employment OpportunllytAfflrmelva Action ......... :, Re.ume Unrillta
• Ha nmwlad 1ha Merkaan o S.rilcel 0.--.t with an u rvlallld l"Nume wllh the.,.., 12 IIIOl'llha.

3 ~~;,. -.*:: :::-':"N-~"t ... ;,,_~ u ,.~ -'", .. QVE'AALl:."L -...-'" S"&>.*Js~~ -M -~ ....... , *. "I"' Ouanllty Heh* taken on Iha RSO po1lllon and 1upervtaor of all Red opw allona at HPS with !Mllmal, end,'at llmes , no guldarice, ea he had a 3 month -.Ind with no Nllltanca ltom SIJnAMlllon. Coinptence Ha hH.ahown tu 1fdls In m . the TtEC NRC lcanae al HPS. lnllilliYe He ha ate DOM! In to fix alluatlona e t HPS Co""""' and Alameda. Vanallity He hN been able 1o adluat orloltllea 10 bnt Ill nee, ,-c1s. Communlc:8don He 1$ edelll at D NIV!dln o auc:clnc:1 accurate wrfltMI and otal comnu,lcallor11 lnald e end outalde ol TIE C. Bert hn dona an excepllonll Job n ltallf*\g In lo lffd lhe HPS radlologk:el team. Dw1ng thll period, he aded u lhe Hnklf HP parfOflnel wllh no 1upeM81on lrom above,

• Iha Corporate Haallh Phyalca Manegar had taken on .,olhe, job. He had to elap 1ft lo p,OYlde **iltanca et othw p,oJeci. auch u Concord and Lowry lo HC:lll a publlc ralatlona wl!tJ lh* client. He II
• highly lllledfve communicator, and prloritiz

.. laakl qvlddy, and efftclenlly to eMure the moat lrnport9nl WDril Ml completed to u,e hlghaat 1tandarda. He hH btlafl partlcullriy effeclllNI In enauq ragUlaloty comp11anc:e ~h ,...pec;t to lha TIEC NRC llcenae. B e,t Is a hlghly vaklad member of the Health Phyalca ta11T1. Ten Tech EC.Inc. Proprietary lnformlllloo 4 .. ... 1 *, .. *. Indicate Jhe goab*tO .be ~t>U~_d-~rid thEI'. ;,~nJ8: fOI tfJalrcoµ1~tk>n. Md sftee~ where-.rtlq\(1$1*..: GQ"alJ.fall , ih1o three Cate*gotres~ TASK GOALS! pro)actand role reqµirements~

• . _ IMPROVEMEl'tT GOAL.~ perfotf1lilrt~!mprov.e~-untreq!lir.eef

DEVELOPMENT GOALS:. t>r:a o arallon for future essf a nments; TASKOOALS 2 TASKGO'Al.5 2010 ESQGOALS: Dev,'9J, '"' Q'f.fral nin glbrt~ l<,..~*C4)1JJ0111le pro~ruiradlallon tundamenlala.

lor tiil!II* mmitlngt enii-tefreshel: trainin gs.,.

• 4 DE.VELOPMENT

'GOALS 2'0 1 0 .P~~IIMI ~~$uJ.WY.~ f'or 1,$mla(s*P.olnl s 11~ey.. . 2010 , .,.. ""O~ *-.*. '"""*',~-...~~ ~~~~.~;"~. , * ~.~;__i. ;.:r-f~-... +.* -ti-+; . *.~~ f* J'* *~ *c-* r~*~ ~* .f~-~-o+' ~~:.~. ,!-lfl*~, .. ,-~~;i.*.~4...,-.:.c/Q~~~~k~**I~ 4t"' '\~ ...... ~i" d * * *¥,/, f7V~*-~i.{:.f-<-"';r:*,~--tr/ ~-,.-~':J'.;

• Wo*~i+* r~~,k_J .1,~*. -e~1u 4c°1.i..M.*/zi~~ .~,.-v'7 l SIGNATURE APPRAISER'~ NAME (PL.EASE Pl;tlNT) SIGNATURE APPRAISER'S SUPERVISOR'

.SNAME(PLEASE..PRINT)

• SIGNATU.RE Tetra. Tech ECJi'l a. PtoprletlUy lnfot;mallon

5 DATe , DATE DATE

.r . Bowers, Elbert You have been prowled with the Jnalrucllon llheet lo preparing tor your pertormanc. appraisal Interview scheduled tor CompleUnf lhla preparation the9t II not e requirement. but an opportunlly tor )'OU lo organize your lhoughll and Identity laalM9 lhat )IOU would Ilka to addreA durfnv lhe lnteMeW. You may wish IO pRMCle It lo your 1uperllaor !or consldemlon prior to yo,r periormanee eppnilsel Thia pr9parallon lheet dou not have lo be 8Ubmltted lo your aupe,vltor end wll not become pert ol any pennenenl Ille u en officel pe,formance eppra!NI document. You detennned how you want lo use ii du!fflg the p,oc:e5s. i,, p,.paring for you, pe,tonnanea apprtlnl lnt1rvlew, you may went lo conuder the following: . -** your perfollnence against *t yea,'s goal9 or ro l e 1xpec:tetlons

. ldenllfy nlW goR Of role PpeclatJOlll lor the comng yaar; . commenl on petfo,m-dllllallllH, obstacles or cons118lnt1 lhet you may haw experienced

• Review lhe ,ating acell(wllh deacrtpllons)

Which wlll be appli.t to each performance cetego,y on your epp,alael. RA.TINO SCALE: 1 -OUlstendl/)l r Emptoyn hN clearly encl conslat.ntly perlormed outawldlng accompllshmenta In 1h19 area which exceed axpeclaUons. Awetd d 1h11 rating raqulrN an example within the context of Iii. peffonnence app,alat L

• 2
• Exceed! Expecl8tJor!

Employee'*

performance on.n ,u~ds exp1dallons for the roln and rHponslblilln ILMlgned lo the employ.e.

3. Meets Expectations:

Employee perform, et* lave! wtllch Is expected for lhe position end conlletsnll)l mffhl lhe role and ra1ponslbUillel eHlgned lo the emplo)lee. 4

• Below ExpectaUoN ( Needs lmp,ovament):

Employ9e perlonnenca In lhla.,.. le not c:analaMftll)I meeting expectations for lhe role and responslblllhs as1lgned lo the employee. Al llmes lhe employee may meal the expectations, howew, , t,e employee dole not contlalently perform el lhe required. Th* employee requlier. funher development In this arae lo meet Iha Wlfenl role n,qulrementa. 6 -Unsebtado ,y Perloml*nce

Employee perlormanc*

la rarely mN4ln; the *xpectdons ror tie role end respon&iblltlQ aalgned lo lhe employ9e. The employee requlrn

• performanc:e lmp,ovement plan end ~rfonnance lmp,owmenl goala , In this wee. Award of lhla '1lllng reqUlrea *n eJCMnP1e ol the noted performance shortfall. We Ncommend
• performence lmprovemenl p&an. Ten Tech EC.Inc:. Proprietary lnlomletlon 6 EXHIElT lP PAGEJL OF JL.PAGE(S)

EXHIBIT 7 Case No. 1~2012-002 Exhibit 7 ['"'ft:) TETRA TECH FUl.l TIME TETRA TECH EC,INC., PERFORMAHCE APPRAISAL FORM Employee H.,,.: Bewwl, EIHft Employee .Nlfflbet: S21089 Petlod FNlm: 10/111>8 Period To : lll30NO PURPOSE: To enhlnce employee and dewlGpn,enl UNtng N a Y111rio1a ID: (e) Ealabllsh and Corrmunlcala the lllrp<<W' .,. ol an wplo,-; (b) Obculs

• daclJll*lt per1ormance In ralalloft lo Ulllbllehad parfa-pla a,d alanclatds; and. (c) ldenlll~ ... amploye_.*

attenglhs and -lo,~ and-lhe eniployee's _,., .,.,.,,__ FREQUENCY: P91fo--laedb9cll ahoUld be pcvYidecl lo Nc:h efflPio',tee on an ~o balla. Perfonnance lhould be lannally dllcuued and docllmenl.cl on -annual heals *

• mlnin'Alm.

F<< dealgnllld ~t lwel empioye .. wi-goela -doRly 11ft lo Iha Company's ennual goals. u. periarrnance app,allal wll ba C0111pleled on* calend,ryea, bGsla. For lhon employees not -.Ung pe,bmance toepeddo,.,

• doc:umanlad epp,elllll a,ld ._.Ion *hould--hquenlly. PREPARATION:

TIie followtng Ii-snovkl be addt9INd In Pfepadng Iha performance eppiwlul Ian* *

• Saldi Input of oOMI pNljad, matrix and dlenl pe,sonMI In a padlorl ID tcnaw hen¥ Iha amplo),ae bN pertonnad for lhe ~-.* R.vl-Iha employee._

pn,gtMa joWenl the~ of praYiollllly aulgnad gom end how Iha *,nplc>yN t.a 11191 delined 1111a NIIJIPGnslbllilla.

• Coneider ell p*ufomance cetago,ta IO delannlne which hwe most C011111buted to the employee'* *~hmanla(annglha) and v.t1ldl how bNn lhe ;ConsldeffUlln goela endn>le ruponalllllln far Ill* Mlllparformance ps,lod.
• Proi4do Ille -playee wllh lhe "Emplo)'ae PJ.,,.,.ean for P~ Af)pl8/NI" lnslNdlon shffl far blalhw p,apwalkll'l 1ar tie proc;na.
• Rwi9w end dl&euu the eppraiaal

\Wllh the aJll)llliul'a UipeM90I" prior la metl!lng 1ritJ the 9fflJIM119L , Commualcele Iha rallng-le end the clNCripdon of Nch nilincl IO your em~ bet01'11 lnlllallnO Iha perfarrnanc:9 appcwlsll mNllng. Gcw. ACHIEVEMENT: RevlaW and ~I pe,fonnanc:o against tho goolslrole upactations set for Int pnmow period. A 1te111Mnl ar copy afprlor y.ar goal mu.I be lndudecl ElrplM! In alell wt-. pe~ ellbar exceeded or cld nat meal~ ~ns and rate ACll gaal aocornpliatwnri RATING SCALE NfO DESCRIPTION: 1 -OUbtandnQ; Effll*lree '-dwty and CDl1llslenlly pe,1ormed CIWd4lndng eccompbmlerlta In Ihle-w1a1en allCNd eapec;taUana. Award al lhl* rating requna an -pl* wMl*l 111* cantul of the pe,lonnance appraisal TeiRI Tac:h EC , lnc. PNlptlelll,Y lnfarmelion 1 3

• Mae1a Elt f!!d!lions:

E~ perbn-a at* IMIY,filch la~ for the pcll'llllon Md~ mnls ui. rollt Md respo111lb1111N aalgMd lo lhe *eraplc,yN. 4

• Balow l!Jpeda~ Nnda am,._,-,!):

EnlplorM In 11111 aru I& not canllstenlly ll'welllg tor Iha l01e and r*pcnlblfllN IIIIIIIDMd loh ~Ju lrnea 1119 ~*may IQel "-expeculnN , hOMWr ,lhe emplo)1ee dNs no1*~portonn

• 1ha IINal nqlllri,d.

TI.-ernplosllM raqulne lllril* dawlaplllelll 111 .. .,.. lo IIIMI V. cumnt role ,....._...

5. u, 1 1C hc:by Performance:

&iployee ,.r<a,mance II niNIIV *m .. a,, Iha axpectetlolls tor lhao rda aind rnpond:RIIM N89* lo it.. ..,.ia,... The~ *ll*N

• pe.b**ice impRMwt plan and pesfoml111a goala. In lllia ..-lvlMrd ollhia,.ing 1r1 .-,,. al lh* naiad patann-lhda&. We .. _... perfamlance plan. PERFORMANCE C4T£80RIE9: eedl P~-*c.1egory-4ill na*d lo how ll did er did nDl canllbN ID ,,.a11ng goal and~ nil* reqUlremena.(Ncupnwlded rllllngllCale.).

Evaiy i:mgo,ywll not.--tly..,... toeec:h araplDYN. and~.* Clltle!01Ynot llledinayllle . Mded lor ** ~-In llpllCII pnlYldacl. . . . '.OVERALL PERFORMNCE EVALUATION

Tba Ptlfo,rnance e\'911.!lllon Ndlon 11 tor Iha appraiser ta wne a .._nt9*..n.c.

hlllh* owrall a11111 man1 of Iha .. .-1an1111ice tor Iha period. THEA£ IS NO OVERALL PERFORMANCE RATING. mu. to 119 CDDaldand In pMP811nt~a1aufflanl-.

• Gaal encl role -..pliltlmenl.
• Pe~ Pft)blelN, wamlngl Ind time,,....

lolnlp,DIIL

• Sv.nghand-forpca~llllllfllh.

-* D-iopm.ni plMll 10 be Nlabl&h In goelnadon. . Elcplanalon ot *nii "S' r9dno ANO any"1° nitlnt,

• S\Jparvla<<

IWal OI N~Ofl win unployN petformlncL NEW 8<>>.LS: Eslabllall goela fof Ila nalll po,f-nca period; Dnalluton al lhaN goall requa... Input and claounlon With the l!pplalHr'S wl*\'ll(lr and wlh 0. amployae. F~ new ell'lpioyNS. goill 1hould be dwaloplld and documen1lld with th* lhfee monllla ol l*'tt date. SIGNATURES: T~ eppraller and ..,. appralufa ai,pemaar mual "9* "1id data Iha c:omptalect 9PPflliAI llllar Iha diacllfflan wtti Iha esaploywa ha occ:urrocL The ... '*11" rnuel IIIGft and dale I!*~ lndlcalng odlf that Iha d1Ku11klr1 h* occuned: Emplc:,yee -,menla llbDIII Che appralul -opUoneL . .... I'/ ,* lm~~fiit~~J.R'm~ M~~r~4t\f,,rWif.lW~~I Flanl! 11111/08 Ta: l/30NO State or attach a copy of the phi and /Of( role requirements established for lhe empl0'/98 since the lalll formal pe,tormance IIIYiew. Review and Indicate progresa made lowald achieving each ofh goala and rate each goal(1

• outstanding.

2-exceea expectallons 3-meets expedaUons, 4-bek>w expectations. unsallafactoty pe,fonnance). Make suJe description lndlcale1 which of the attached goals 18 referenced. ('ldd sheet& wheRl requltad. TASK GMl..8 Manage lhe HP staff al Hunters Polnl to meet radk>loglc:al ramedlalan 3 su,vey mllaSk>nea. 2 TASK GOALS Manage lhe NRC llcenae at Hulllets Point lo matntart compliance. 3 I No NRC .._ IAI* been ,alHd by elhlMI ,...,..l&ICL 3 l!SQ Gcw.a Develop series of ltainlnglbr1efing* to c:over corporate 3 p,oc:edures/radlatlon fla'ldamentala for tailgate meetk'igs and ratrasher traln~a. 4 TIIMllleNRRPT-

, 6 DEVB.OPMENT GOALS Prepare one Final Status Survey Report for* Hunters Point SUrvey. :, EXHtBlT___.] __ PAG E_!L OF -1.t_PAGE(S)

~a,e,t ~11i!.~~1*: -~it&~WiS~~I Rate each lstad.perfonnlmce catego,y, and eny yoo add, as folows: (1) OU'8tandlng.(2) Exoaects E>ciiecwtlone {S) Meet Expectallona, (4) Below Expectatb,s(needa improvement) (5) Unsallsfaetcxy Pefforma,oe. Rating d.elther a *1 ot "6* re es add docuMnlatlon.

• *
• 2 3 a 3 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 *a "" , v.r.* . "' Mr. a--hn led b HNllhP.hyltca lean Ill Hl#ltlN Polr!t 8hlpyanl He hN eneur.d lhe TIEC MAC ac.nee 15 IIINUlnad 111
• IPhb,, and hu GOON!lrwlad
• taff to -lh*t ~y radlallon aalety ~tlon*.,.

c:onduclad prapa,iy. Atldltlonelly, he hH coaninalecl lnllnln9 and clD9fnMy for-" parfclrmad by~ enlll* undel' O. um11r*o1 ... TehTedl bu.wlda radialaglcal

• uppa,t oonlrad, * -* N coordinlllll1g ct,-nga lo the Mernalalldum al ~cine for 1111 COWIIGbw-'*-

al HP8. T.tia Tedi EC.Inc. Prap,tell,y 1"'°""8tlclft .. ' Indicate the goals to be established and the Ume frame for lhelr completion. Add sheets where required. Goals tall into three Categories: TASK GOALS: project and role requirements: IMPROVEMENt GOALS: performance Improvement required; DEVELOPMENT GOALS: orenarallon for futlft asslCJnm8nta. TASK GOALS Mahlmn Ille NRC llcelse el HPS lo echleYe conllllued com~ 2011 2 TASK GOA LS o..,.iop

• 1-.clwble

...... clah .. Of dalebaM to lnc:k penannal IIXpOaUfll ._. by 2.011 --period Md llledrn9 let& 3 es c DeYelop * ..... ot llalnlng br1** baaed on changeS lo Corpcnla Raf.,_ utnry 2011 pfflCedura chang-. I have '9Vlewed tt\Ja spP'9lsal and discussed the contents with my supervisor. My signature below Indicates lhal I have been edvbed ~f my perlormance status ..,.--,,_ ~kcJ b:(~.~-n 2cZ.2 ) ;/./C, /CJ EMPLOYEE'S NAME(PlEASE PR INT) SIGNATURE e --1.'(-b)-(7)-(C-) -----J-------.r){7)(CJ ...... ________ __J APPRAISER'S NAME(PLEASE PR I NT) SIGNATU RE APPRAISER'S SU~ERVISOR'SNAME(PLEASE PRINT) SIGNATURE Tetra T cdl EC.Irle. Proprietary lnlormellon s DATE DATE DATE Ycu h.,,. been pnwtdecl

• h i!lullC:iloa llieet to ptepedno far)OIM' pllfw* app,allal lnlarvlew achediad far //. /~ ./C) . . . . ... -.* Complellng 1h11 pt9perallail allatt ls nal * ~Ill, bll 811 cippo,tl#!Ay far )\'lU ID arganiZa )'Ullr llaougl* and 15111911!

Iha J'Ollwauld Ilea to addrNs dUltng Ille~-You mw,wflh ID pn,vlda l-lo )'air "'~.tar ~llan pdorlo peifonnance appraisal~ Toll p,eparalbuhaet cloes not te¥e to' be aubmllled lo )'lltlt lllpeMW anCS (1111 ftlll become PIii al.,,,.. penwtenl ....... olllc:al i-1-nce app,a!NI Y<

Subject:

FW: HPS Data -Parcel UC3 Sewer Trench Unit 187 (T003) Team, We have received concurrence from the RASO to backfill Trench Unit No. 187. Trench Unit No. 187 (TU187) is located in Work Area #16 of Parcel UC3. It ls 757 square meters in area (8148.28 square feet) and 376 linear feet in length. Engineers have estimated that a total of 759 cubic yards of soil will be needed to backfill this trench unit. The backfill soil proposed for TU187 is as follows: Total RASO Trench Work ES IR Estimated Adjusted Re mediated Estimated Cleared Unit Area Unit# Site Yards 3 Yards 3 Yards 3 Yards 3 Backfill 187 UC3 0307 00 324 243 2 241 17-Nov-10 16 0309 00 300 225 7 218 17-Nov-10 0318 00 140 105 0 105 25-0ct-10 Total 764 573 9 564 Imported Mills Peninsula Hospital soil will be utilized for additional cubic yardage (esL 195 yd 3) given the project requirement for a final compacted so il layer. Plea se keep the Data Group informed on a daily basis as to the actual quantity used in backfilling the t r ench and th e quantity left over to be used in a different t r e n ch unit in the future if appllcable. Thank you, l (b)(7)(C) ,.,i,+1~....r...;....u. wu..ll.M.l.

---

'-...i.i,:U,.1.Ji...., 415.671.1990 I Fax: 415.671.1995 I Cell: ______ .. IO Environmental

& Infrastructure, Inc. I Hunters Point Shipyard 2840 Adams Ave. I San Diego, CA 92116 I www.ioenvironmental .com PLEASE NOTE: This message , including any attachments, may include confidential and/or inside information. An y dist ri bution or use of this communication by anyone other than the intended recipient is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender by replying to this message and then delete it from your system. Think Green -Not every email needs to be printed. -----Ori g inal From: !(b)(7)(C) Sent: Thursda 06 20 11 7:15 AM To: (b)(7)(C) (b)(7)(C) 1:a2012~002 !(b)(7 H IL,_..,......-------------------------------, Cc : !(b)~(C) !(b)(7)(C) SubJec: RE: HPS Data -Parcel UC3 Sewer Trench Unit 187 (T003) l (b)(7)(C) I have reviewed the Survey Unit 187 Project Report. I concur with backfilling the trench. !(b)(7)(C) r (7)(C) Yorktown Naval Weapons Station r'(7)(C) I HPS Data* Parcel UC3 Sewer Tr ench Unit 187 (T003) Attached for your review is the Internal Draft Survey Unit 187 Project Report and Attachments 1 through s, 7, and 8. Attachment 6 is QA data and is not available at this time. We would like concurrence to backfill the trench. l (b)(7)(C) ,.....!:!D.;;.ir~e=.J:C a.!t:..:.:.J.l (:..;b),;_(7);.;.(C_) ______ ..1.l~1M 1,:;1-.i.i.." u.,' 415.671.1990 I Fax: 415.671.1995 I Cell: Ll (b-)(-7)-(C_) ____ __, (b)(7)(C) _ l (b)(7)(C) 200 South Virginia St , Suite 800 I Reno, NV 89501 I www.radsvcs.com PLEASE NOTE: This message, including any attachments, may include confide n tial and/or inside information. Any distribution or use of this co mmunication by anyone other than the intended recipient is strictly p rohi bited and may be unlawful. If you are not the intended recipient , please notify the sender by replying to this message and then delete it fro m your system. P Think Green -Not every email need s to be printed. 2 EXHl>IT 9 Pf--OE~ OF-3:!-PAGE-(S) (b)(7)(C) From: l (b)(7)(C) I Sen t: T o: _T..;.h..;.u.;,.rs;..;d...;a.:.y.:..* .;.Ja;;;.n..;.u;;..;a;;;.ry~0-6.:.., .;;;.2.;...;.011__;, 1...;: 0;..;9_P_M __________ __, r)(:}(C) r)(l)(CJ !Bowers, Bert; J ; ' Sub je c t: FW: HPS Data -Parce l UC3 Sewer Trench Unit 190 (T003) Team, We have received concurrence from the RASO to backfill Trench Unit No. 190. Trench Unit No. 190 (TU190) is located in Work Area #16 of Parcel UC3. It is 580 square meters in area (6243.07 square feet) and 250 linear feet in length. Engineers have estimated that a total of 635 cubic yards of soil will be needed to backfill this trench unit. The backfill soil proposed forTU190 is as follows: Total RAS O Tre n ch Work ES I R Estimated Adjusted Re mediated Estimated C l ea r ed Unit Area Unit# Site Yards 3 Yards 3 Yards 3 Yards 3 Backfill 190 UC3 0312 00 300 225 1 224 17-Nov-1 0 16 0317 00 300 225 0 225 25-0ct-10 Total 600 450 1 449 I mported Mills Peni n sula Hospital soil will be utilized for additional cubic yardage (est. 186 yd 3) given the project requirement for a final compacted soil layer. Please keep the Data Group informed on a daily basis as to the actual quantity used in backfilling the trench and the quantity left ove r to be used in a different trench unit in the future if applicable. Thank you, (b)(7)(C) _D_i_r_e_c_t_:~(~b)_(~~(C_) ______ ....__M_a_i__, n: 415.6 71.1990 I Fax: 415.671.1995 I Cell: l~(b-)U-l(_c_) ____ _, (b)(7)(C) IO Environmental & Infrastructure , I n c. I Hunters Point Shipyard 2840 Adams Ave. I San Diego, CA 92116 I www.i oenvironmental .co m PLEASE NOTE: This message, including any attachments, may include confidential and/or inside information. Any distribution or use of this communication by anyone other than the intended recipient is strictly prohibited and may be unlaw-ful. If you are not the inte n ded recipient, please notify the sender by replying to this message and then delete it from your syste m. ra Think Green -Not every email needs to be printed. -----Ori g inal Messa g e-----F rom: 1..f b_)(_7)_(C_) _______ __,,,,__,.......,....,._.,......., ,.,,,......,,.,.,..---------------------------' Sent: ~hu rs d ay , J anuar y 0 6 1 2011 1:05 PM .....J J~o!.i*.J!~{b:1.1, l/7!.L)(!..!a C:.1..l ________________________________________ J l (b)(7)(C) r 1 l\~,'1) I Cc: '.-r-)(-7)-(C-)------------------------------------, !{b)(7)(

Subject:

RE: HPS Data -Parcel UC3 Sewer T rench Unit 190 (T003) !(b)(7)(C) I have reviewed the Survey Unit 190 Pro ject Report. I concur with backfilling the trench. j (b)(7)(C) l (b)(7)(C) Yorktown Nayal Weaoons Station l (b)(7)(Cl l arce ewer Trench Unit 190 (T003) Attached for your review is the Internal Dra ft Survey Unit 190 Project Report and Attachments 1 through s, 7, and 8. Attachment 6 is QA data a nd is not available at this time. We would like concurrence to back fil l the trench. l (b)(7)(C) I I l (b)(7)(C) Direct: ~(b_)(_~_(C_) __ __, I Main: 415.671.1990 I Fa x: 41S.671.199S I Cell:~-------' l (b)(7)(C) l (b)(7)(C) 200 South Virginia St. S u ite 800 I Reno, NV 89501 I www.r adsvcs.com PLEASE NOTE: This message, including any attachments, may include confidential and/or inside information. Any distribution or use of this communication by anyone other than the intended recipient is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you are not the intended recipient, please n otify the sender by replying to this message and then delete it from your system. P Think Green -Not every email needs to be printed. 2 EXHIBIT 10 Case No. 1-2012-002 Exhibit 10 From:!(b)(7)(C) sent: Wednesday, Ja n uary 04, 2012 3:14 PM To: Bowers, ee_rt ___ ....

Subject:

RE:!lbl(7l(Cl !voice message to B. Bowers dated December 30, 2011 at 1007 hrs .... Bert, Just to be clear , are you interested in possible opportunities with Tt HEl, and sho uld l explore those further? Or , do you want to remain in the Bay Area, so the opportunity with HEI is not of interest to you? If you're Interested , I'll start discussions with Tt HEI about vou and the the capabilities vou can bring to them to see if there's a fit. Thanks, l (b)(7)(C) I From: Bowers, Bert 5en~t:i ilednesday. January 04, 2012 2:17 PM To: I bll7 C l I

Subject:

R E: (b)(7)(Cl voice message to B. Bowers dated December 30, 2011 at 1007 hrs .... (b)(7)(C) Many thank s for your respons e. While not y et "aware of a specific current opportunity" in the San Francisco Bay Area unique to my original T etra Tech assignment , I remain optimistic that such a role will event ually surface. In that regard -and due to ongoing regulatory and investigative activities s t i ll ongoing specific t o that assignment, cu rr en t needs are to r ema in in the San Francisco area so as t o be readily available to support related processes and ob ligations. In the in te rim , Tetra Tech's commitment to "find a suitable position" for me is app re ciated and accepted wi th pos i tive anticipat io n. Regards , Bert From: !(b)(l)(C) Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2012 7:34 AM To: Bo wers , B ... e ..... rt ___ .... Sub j ect: R E: !(b)(7)(C) ~oice message t o B. Bowers dated December 30, 2011 at 1007 hrs .... Bert, I'm following up on the voicemail I left you last week, and your e-mail reply below. I am not aware of a specific current opportunity in Tetra Tech for EXHJSIT It> *1'"-~r:_LOF L PAGE($) which you would be suited. However, HEI is a Tetra Tech subsidiary based in Oak Ridge , TN that is heavily involved in DOE projects. HEl's primary locations are Oak Ridge , Portsmouth , OH, and Paducah. KY. Please let me know if you are interested in p*otential opportunities with Tetra Tech HEI. If you are , I will contact their management to pursue possible opportunities for you. We want to find a suitable position for you. Thanks. l (b)(7)(C) ,___~voice message to B. Bowers dated December 30, 2011 at 1007 h rs .... l (b)(7)(C) ! In ref erence to the subject line above, I am I n receipt of your message. Regarding "possib l e opportunities" as was referred to, I would respectfully submit that any corresponding proposal(s) be placed in writing. Strong consideratio n will be given to whatever is conveyed. This recommended approach should avoid any misunderstandings. "Happy Holidays and many thanks LJ I look forward to hearing from you. Bert Bowers EXHIBIT 11 Case No. 1-2012-002 Exhibit 11 From: Sant: Murphy , Timothy ftmurphy@laborlawyers .com1 Thursda , Jul 19, 2012 2: 17 PM To: S ub ject: co s Message Declining the Saudi Arabia Position: September 2, 2011 Donrich , I looked again and found a copy of an email from John Scott declin i ng the Tetra Tech offe r of a position for Bowers I n Saudi Arabia. His email indicates he was "current l y employed" in the Bay Area and not interested in leaving. Please let me know If you have any further questions. Regards, Tim > From: "John H. Scott" <john@scottlawfirm.net<mailto

john@scottlawfirm

.net>> > Date: September 2, 2011 4:17:39 PM PDT > To: "Murphy, Timothy" <tmurphy@laborlawyers.com<mai l to:tmurphy@laborlawyers .com>> >

Subject:

Bert Bowers > >Tim, > > Bert is presently employed in the Bay Area and is not interested in leaving. He would seriously consider a job offer in the Bay Area but is not i nterested in a job in Saudi Arabia. Thank you for thinking of him. > > John H. Scott > Scott Law Firm > 1388 Sutter Street, #715 > San Francisco, CA 94109 > Direct: 415.561.9601 > Fax: 415.561.9609 > john@scottlawfirm .net<mailto:john@scottlawfirm.net> > www. scottlawfirm .net<http://www. scottlawfirm. net> > 1 EXH18IT 1 \ PAGE+ OF _L.PAC~(S) EXHIBIT 12 Case No. 1-2012-002 Exhibit 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 11 12 13 1 4 1 5 16 17 18 19 20 21 2 2 23 24 25 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION + + + + + OFFICE OF INVESTIGATIONS INTERVIEW

---

x IN THE MATTER OF: INTERVIEW OF or Case No. l (b)(7)(C) 1-2012-002 (C L O SED) ------------------------------x Thursday, May 24, 2012 Tetra T ech EC, Inc. 1 The above-entitled interview was c o nducted a t 2:25 p.m. Eastern Standard Time. BEFORE: Agent l (b)(7)(C) Special ,___ ________ ___. EXHIBIT ( )-PAGE_l_ OF JiYiAGE( (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON, O.C. 20005-370 1 www.nealrgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 1 2 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 2 APPEARANCES:

On Behalf of the Interviewee. Other Individuals Involved in t he Case and Tetra Tech EC, Inc.: of: (202) 234-4433 TIMOTHY J. MURPHY , ESQ. (via telecon) Managing Partner Fisher & Phillips, LLP One Embarcadero Center Suite 2340 San Francisc o, CA 94111-3712 (4 15) 490-9011 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross .com l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1.3 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 3 P R O C E E D I N G S {2:25 p.m.) SPECIAL AGENT l (b)(l)(G) Today' S date is Thursday, May 24~h, 2012. The time is currently 2:25 p.m. Eastern Standard Time. For the record, this is an interview of l (b)(l)(C) I who is employed with Tetra Tech EC, Inc. We are at !(b)(l)(G) at r:X ,xc> office _ l lbXl l(C) I And the zip code here in ... r_x 1_x c_) _______ __, .... -------' l (b)(7)(C) I I am._ ________ __. a Special Agent with the Office of Investigations, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Region I Field Office in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania. Also present via teleconference from his office in San Francisco, California is legal counsel to l (b)(7)(C) !today, M r. Timothy Murphy of the la w firm of Fisher Pillips. I will give Mr. Murphy an opportun ity to introduce himself to the record shortly. The subject of this interview today is to discuss NRC OI Case Number 1-2012-002 and concerns Tetra Tech former RSO, Radiation Safety Officer representative at Hunters Point, Elbert Bowers, goes by the name Bert Bowers, who has filed claims of discrimination against Tetra Tech upon raising related concerns. That will be the balance of our (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT RE P ORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON , D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross .com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 4 discussion here this afternoon. I want to first tell you that I'm a Special Agent with the United States Government. Under Title 18 of the United States Code, Section 1001, the false statement provision. And what it essentially says, if you knowingly and willingly make any false, fictitious, or fraudulent statements or representations and provide false information you can be subject to prosecution under 18 USC Section 1001 which is a felony punishable by a sentence of up to five years confinement and a $250,000 fine. That's not a threat in any way. Tha t's just to say as a U.S. Federal Agent and as a representative of the NRC it's imperative that you be honest and forthright with us here today. !_(b_J(7_l(_c) ________ __.b Sure. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) Okay. And Mr. Murphy has previously been apprized of this with the other interviews we've done in this matter. Okay. If you could please raise your right hand. Do you swear that the testimony you' re about to provide is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? (202) 2~3 l (b)(l)(C) I Yes, I do. NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.ne alrgross.com l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 11 12 13 14 1 5 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 5 (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT .__ __ _, Thank you. Please state your full name for the record, spell your last name. l (b)(7)(C) I l (b)(7)(C) .... _______ _,: It's ... ------------' .... l (b_)(7_)(C_l __ ____.! as in .... l (b_)(7_)(c_J ____ ___.l. SPECIAL AGENT l (b)(7)(C) !: Okay. I have a couple of questions for you regarding your representation here today. Is Mr. Murphy representing you personally for the purpose of today's interview? .... !(b_)(7_J (C_J ____ _.I: Yes. SPECIAL AGENT !{b)(7)(C) !: Does your employer r equire you to have an attorney present when being i nterviewed by NRC OI? ~l'b-)(7-)(-cJ __________ ...... !: No. SPECIAL AGENT ~!(b~)(-l)-(C_J___,!: Were you ever th r eatened with adverse action if you did not request corporate counsel here today? _r_)(-7)(-C) ________ ____.l: No. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) : Did either corporate counsel or a company representative instruct or suggest to you how you should respond to the line of questioning here today by OI? ~l (b_H 7l_(c_J ____ ...J!: No. SPECIAL AGENT l (b)(7)(C) I= Will the presence of Mr. Murphy hinder your testimony in any way? (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON. D.C. 20005-3701 www .neaJrgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 l l 12 13 14 1 5 1 6 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 6 _l (b-)(D_(_C)~~~~__.I: No. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) Do you understand that you have the right to a private interview with me at a time of your convenience? _!(b-)(7-)(-CJ~~~~~~I: Yes. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) : Thank you. Okay. Mr. Murphy, some attorney questions for you. Are you acting as the personal representative for~l (b-)(-7)-(C-)~~~~~~ today's interview? for the purpose o f MR. ~URPHY: Yes, I am. SPECIAL AGENT !(b)(7)(C) !: Could you please introduce yourself and your firm for the record. MR. MURPHY: T. J. Murphy, law firm of Fisher & Phillips. And my office is located at One Embarcadero Center, California. Suite 2 050, San Francisco, SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) : And, Mr. Murphy, have you deemed there to be any conflict with your . l (b)(7)(C) representation for~~~~~~~---' here today? MR. MURPHY: No. l (b)(7)(C) I SPECIAL AGEN~,__~__,: Should you determ i ne that there is any conflict between your representation 0 f ~(b)(7)(C) and also Tetra Tech , what is your course of action? (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHOD E ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON. D.C. 2000~3701 www.nealrgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 B 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 7 MR. MURPHY: I will follow the Rules of Professional Conduct as set out by the Administrative --well , by the Supreme Court of the State of California in resolving any conflict, should one arise. SPECIAL AGENT E:~l Okay. Thank you, sir. l (b)(7)(C) I Okay.~*-------'~ how long have you served as the !(b)(7)(C) ~ere at Tetra Tech? l (b)(7)(C) I ..... _____ __,: Well, I've been employed here for about rr 7 x ci l ~x i!"lx"" ci ____ _. _____ l on the license ._-----.=====::::;----1 I believe. I guess the --I've been SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) Okay. And in what other position were you employed prior to --~l (b_J(_7)c_c_J ________ ---'!: Well, my official position is the~l (b-)(-7)-(C_) ______________ ___J~

• SPECIAL AGENT l (b)(?)(C) I: Oh. l (b)(7)(C) I -*-------J

= Okay. So, on our NRC license there is a position called a~l (b_)(_7)_(c_) ______ _l (b_J (_7)_(c_J __ ~I , and in order for me t o get on that I had to go and submit paperwork and all that, so that took a --there was a little bit of delay from the time that I came in on the job until I got put o n the license as the l (b)(7)(C) 1. SPECIAL AGENT l (b)(l)(C) l Okay. With whom were you previously employed prior to Tetra Tech and in (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1 323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON , D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 8 what capacity? l (b)(7)(C) I was a l (b)(7)(C) ~l (b_)(n_(_C) ______________ ___,!at the ~r_x , x_r_, ______________________ ___. X1X C) LJ for r)(lX C) r X 7 X C) I I think maybe L----------.....J

• That's in SPECIAL AGENT Ll (b_H_7)_(c_i....Jr._~_1)(_C)--------------I

... !(b_)(_7 l_(c_) _____ ..J!: Yes. Correct. Did you want all my history, or just SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) No, that's good. l (b)(7)(C) I ._ _______________

Okay. SPECIAL AGENT !(b)(?)(C)

!: When did you begin working in the nuclear industry? .. l (b_)(_7 l_(c_) _____ ...ii: E':J, I guess. I started "'[ib"" X*""'x c"'" i------'----i----l i G x l x c i work ing in the as a "'r"" X7""'xc"'">-------...... , .__ ____ __, (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT :

• Civilian?

.... l (b-)(7-)(C_) ____ ....,I; Yes. Correct. Civil Service. (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT : So, your professional background has essentially been all in engineering, radiation l (b)(7)(C) I ~-_______ _.F Yes, engineering and hea lth physics, yes. (202) 234-4433 (b)(7)(C) d SPECIAL AGENT : An you're a degreed NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANS CRIB ERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WAS H I NGTON , D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross .com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 11 1 2 13 14 15 16 17 1 8 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 9 L..l (b_)(7)_(c_) ____ ____.!? f XJ X C) I l (b)(7)(C) I L. :::;;;==========-

_r_h_a_v_e_ in heal th My [)())(C) I physics. ._ ___________

___.was in electrical engineering. (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT Okay. So, what are your duties and responsibilities under y o ur current P osition as a l (b)(7)(C) .....__ _____ _____. ... l (b-)(-7)-(C_) ____ ___.!= There' s a number of things. (b)(7)(C) First of all, I'm involved in l (b)(7)(C) l (b)(7)(C) l (b)(7)(C) I L----------1 I'm sure they probably went into th i s bu t the vast ma j ority of what we do is cleanups of radiological contaminated areas, !(b)(7)(C) l (b)(7)(C) l (b)(7)(C) As far as the l (b)(?)(C) --------------~ l (b)(7)(C) l (b)(7)(C) I L-------------------------_J

• And we have an RSOR representative at each site since I can't be everywhere at once. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(7)(C) : And what are your requirements by the license because you're the L!(b-)(7_)_(c_J ____ ___,J~ so what does that entail? (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1 323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHING TON , D.C. 20005-3701 www.nea!rgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 10 l (b)(7)(C) I .... _______ ___.: Well, that's going to , l (b)(7)(C) require that ._ _____________________

-..J (b)(7)(G) Although on our sites technically we wouldn't really be required to have people monitored for external exposure because we have plenty of documentation that we' re less than 100 millirem a l (b)(7)(C) year .. (b)(7)(C) 1 1')17)(C) l (b)(7)(C) nutshell. j,_(b_)r_Hc_) __________________________ --..JI __ That's kind of it in a SPECIAL AGENT l (b)r)(C) Okay. What type of trainings have you received and what type of certifications do you hold for your current position? (202) 234-4433 [)(J)(C) !_'b_)m_(c_i ________ -1 , I'm a_ NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHING TON , D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgoss.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11. 12 1 3 1.4 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 11 so I had to get --that involved getting recommendations, experience, and testing for that. I'm l'm also a ~r_*1_~_) ____ __. I've had a number of different NRC courses, including like the NRC inspection course, the NRC material licensing course. I've had some moisture density training, aome industrial radiography training. In my previous position working at LJ we -D b ll(Cl -what oes for the is essentia l ly acts as sort of a mini-NRC for th b)( C J for? SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) : Right, for the LJ l (b)(7)(C) I: Right. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C)

What does RASO stand l (b)(7)(C) L r)(7)(C) b -~---" Support Office. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) k d h ....__ _ __,: o ay. An t at: was ---when you worked there that was here in r"" I .... (b-)(7-)(C_) ____ _,!: Yes, you're correct. (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT : But there is a rep, ....__ _ __. if I'm to understand this correctly, on all the sites such as Hunters Point, a decommissioning site. There's a RASO office the r e on site, or there's a representative?

(202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COUR T R EP O R TE RS AND TRANS CR IB ERS 1 32 3 R HO DE I S LAN D A V E .* N.W. WA SH I NGT O N , D.C. 20005-370 1 www .nealrgross.co m 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 1 5 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 l2 ... r_)(-7)(_C_) ____ ____.1 = Well, for somebody from Tetra Tech, there will be a radiation safety officer representative. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) : Right. l (b)(7)(C) I ._ _______ __,= Somebody like Bert who's always there. (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT..__~: Right. .... l (b_)(7_)(C_) ____ ____.~ RASO wil 1 come out periodically, somewhat 7 X C l (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT : Okay. l (b)(l)(C) !: I mean, a l ot of times D l lb X7l(C) I .... ____ _. with RASO because we' re going --SPECIAL AGENT !(b)(l)(C) ! : Do the --l (b)(l)(C) I .... _______ _,= Yes, we' re going to work on issues together. We want to go and look at this particular site, how are we going to handle it, all that. So, a lot of times SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) RASO is actually here locally in e l X Q 'r======--- 1 ( b) ( 7) ( C) Right. Correct, but they fly out. (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT : Okay. So, you are you said you' re responsible for._!'b-)(_7l_(c_) _________ ...J .... l (b-)(7-)(C_) -------------------'~ (202) 234-4433 l (b)(7)(C) I .... ______ __.: Correct. I mean, typically, NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE .* N.W. WAS H ING T ON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1.1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 13 I'm not the one who's actually doing it, but I'll put and l~)Cl)(C) I it together ~-----~ : he RSOR --(b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT L----': So, the RSORs are the ones that actually initiate, facilitate the training on site? l (b)(7)(C) I ~--------__,= Correct. Correct. SPECIAL AGENT l (b)(7)(C} I= And how often is that training conducted? l~b}(7)(C) I .... -------~= It depends. We have at least annually we have training. What we do right now at Hunters P oint, we have five to ten-m inute training additionally every day to strengthen rad contacts on their fundame ntals and everything. So, i t's a minimum of annually but we try to do a whole lot more above and beyond. (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT And are all employees on site required to complete training wherein they are oriented on what a nu clear safety concern is? Are they trained to know what's nuclear safety and what's not, kind of decipher the difference? ._!(b_)(_7)_(c_) __________ _,~ Right. We go and provide them information on the NRC Form 3, and that in fo, so if they have a concern about something that we prefer that they go and bring it up to the supervisor, and let us work it internally, but by all means they have (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COUR T REPORTERS AND T RANSCR I BERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WA SH ING TON , D.C. 2000~3701 www.nealrgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1 7 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 14 every right to go to the NRC and make a complaint or allegation. -l (b)a)(C)I

• SPECIAL AGENT : But are they being trained to know the difference between the two, this is a safety concern and this isn't. This is probably --or even to know what's nuclear safety-related.

l (b)(7)(C) I Well, yes. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) What's OSHA, what's Occupational Safety Related? Do you think the guys on s i te there have a pretty good meter on what's what? l (b)(7)(C) I= Yes, I think so. I mean, we --because one of our main things is well, here's an RCA. If it's posted as a Radiolog ical ly Controlled Area that's where we might have something that we can have contamination or an external dose hazard. So, if you're going to be going in there, you have to have training, and you have to have a TLD. And you have to get surveyed on your way out. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) Right. l (b)(7)(C) I ._ ________ --1: So, they're all aware of t hat, yes. SPECIAL AGENT L__J: Are employees granted protection from reprisal if they raise safety-related concerns? (202) 234-4433 l (b)(7)(C) I .... ______ __,= Yes. Again, they' re trained NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON , D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 15 that they can notify the NRC if they want. though? (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT Is that frowned upon, l (b)(7)(C) I .... _______ _.: No. I mean, there's all sorts of ways that you can bring up any internal stuff. You grab your supervisors, you can use ZIP slips, you can notify SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) : Are ZIP slips like anonymous tips you throw in a box and somebody looks at them? Are they in the computer system? What are ZIP slips? l (b)(7)(C) I ._ _______ __.: It's a computer --well, I believe you can hard copy them, too, but there's a c omputer system way to go and load them in there. I'm not sure whether you have the option of being anonymous on it or not. I'd have to go look at it. But, I mean, generally you want to go and say who you are so somebody can follow-up. So, like well, what did you see, what was your current SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) Right. l (b)(7)(C) I .... -------~: So we can fix it. SPECIAL AGENT l (b)(7)(C) Okay. If an employee raises a safety-related concern how is it documented by management and what does the procedure and process consist of? (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1 323 RHODE ISLAND AVE , , N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 16 l (b)(7)(C) I .... ______ __,= We 11 , it depends on what it is. I mean, it could be documented through a deficiency notice from the QA Department. It could be documented through a ZIP slip. It could be if it's the results of like I periodically do audits and document those, so if it's a result of an audit, it could be in my annual audit . Any one of those mechanisms really. And it depends on the level of the severity, or whatever, as well. guys use condition notices is SPECIAL AGENT !(b)(l)(C) l Okay. .... , (b-)(7)-(C-)-----, --------------- '. Right. (b)(7)(C) What --SPECIAL AGENT.___--': Are there --do you --it's typical in then nuclear world, reports, CRs? l (b)(7)(C) I= Well, that's deficiency what we call them. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(7)(C) You call them deficiency notices. .... l (b_)(7_)(C_) ___ __,!: Yes. SPECIAL AGENT l (b)(7)(C) I= Can any employee generate those? Can any employee go on in the computer system and generate a deficiency notice, like in the nuclear world --(202) 234-4433 ~l (b_)(7_l (_c) ________ ___s.L Right. SPECIAL AGENT l (b)(l)(C) --you know, Rps, NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS ANO TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON, O.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross .com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 3 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 17 laborers, the guys can have access to go in on a terminal, log in and write a CR if they see something. l (b)(7)(C) I .... _______ __,; Right . No, I mean, our parallel I guess would really be like the ZI? slip situation. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) Now, you said the employees are supposed to raise the concerns through the use of ZIP slips, going to their supervisor, deficiency notice. These are all l (b)(7)(C) I ._ ________ .J: Yes. And, also, on the radiation safety side, I mean, we train them such that now if they don't get a satisfactory answer from their supervisor, that they're supposed to go to the RSOR. If they don't get a satisfactory answer from that person, to contact me. Everybody should have the RSOR' s and my phone number in their log books. And the same thing, if I don't give them a satisfactory answer, please call the NRC. (b)(7)(G) SP ECIAL AGENT : When layoffs occur, ..._ _ __, how is it determined which employees are laid off and which are retained? ... l (b_)r_i_, c_i ____ __.l: I think a lot of it has to do or has been recently how many billable hours they have, because we've had management layoffs primarily my l fb)(JX C) since I've been here, and I'm on . (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND T RANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.neatrgross.c om l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 lO 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 18 supervisor/boss. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) : And does that work the same for employees, non-management employees? l (b)(7)(C) I .... _______ _.: Yes, I would think it would work the same way. I mean, that and I think people are going to look at your relative value as far as how your performance appraisals have been and the feedback from other people. speculating. Again, I I m just kind of (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT When did you become acquainted with Bert Bowers and under what circumstance? l (b)(7)(C) I -* _______ __,,= It was right before I started working at Tetra Tech. I came out for essentially an interview with some of the people out th ere at the project, so I met him around that time. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C)

So, that was ~r_)(-7)_(c_, _____ __.I= It was about L r_x'_x C_) _____ ago. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) Okay, SO L_J --l (b)(l)(C) l ~c .... ______________

_,: LJ probably like e J)(C) Of fwxc>l. something like that, beginning L___J maybe. SPECIAL AGENT !(b)(l)(C) !: And at the time you met him, what position was he in? (202) 234-4433 l (b)(7)(C) I ._ _______________ -J: At the time he was the RSO NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAN D AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www .nea lrgrOSS.CO!'n 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 3 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 19 on the Tetra Tech license, and he was --but kind of serving as the RSOR on site, as well. SPECIAL AGENT !(b)(l)(C) !: Now, was that a common thing to be the RSO and the RSOR on site. Was he kind of doing a fill-in role? l (b)(7)(C) I L... _______ ..J: He was kind of doing a fill-in role because he got hired on and then the person I replaced, _, (b-)(_7l_(c_) ____ ..... I , I think just left r~l X C) I , maybe _______ ___,r ater or something like that. So, in the meantime they had to go and have somebody fill the RSO position while they were looking for a replacement for (b)(7)(C)

• SPECIAL AGENT l (b)(7)(C) Okay. Do you know how long he filled in that position before you got here? l (b)(7)(C) L I want to say he was maybe working maybe four months before I got there. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(7)(C) Okay. l (b)(7)(C) I -*--------

= But he was actually technically on the license as the RSO for a few months after that, like I said, when I put in my application. SPECIAL AGENT l (b)(7)(C) I: So, when you initially came on was he working for you at that time? Was he --he was still on the license as the RSO, you were transitioning. (202) 234-4433 l._(b_)(7_)(_c) ____ ---J!: Right. NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON , D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

1. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 11 12 1 3 1 4 15 16 ]7 1 8 19 20 21 22 23 24 2 5 20 (b)(7)(C) So, he was kind of SPECIAL AGEN T helping you get acclima t ed. ... !f b_l 1_1)_1c_i-----------'!

Right, right, right. Yes. And the way it's set u p , I mean, everybody is ass i gned to projects so l ike he works for me, and at the time he worked for ... l (b-)(-7 l_(c_) -----------"i who was the !(b)(7)(C) l (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT '-------'

On the site. l (b)(7)(C) I ----------------~ =Right.So, like all of the heal th physics supervisors c ome ou t of like the Rad Departmen t pool of people, and then when they're on t he i r project t hey' re essentially w o rk i ng f o r t he pr oj ect manager. (b)(?)(C) SPECIAL AGENT ...._ _ __, Right. What kind of employee was Bowers? ~l (b_J(_7)_(C_)----------~~ Well, when I first s c arted off he was helpful when I was transition i ng, but the --I guess probably the last year he was there they kind o f had some difficulty because he seemed to be getting into sort o f issues with the other health physics supervisors. And L..r-)(7)--(C-)------------....J' had some issues with him not ge t ting involved in the day-to-day rad decisions. Let's see, I t hink it was about October of 2010, whenever we were doin g our performance appraisals for the year, one of the things I do is (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS C O URT R E POR TE RS AND TRANSCRIB E RS 1 323 RHO D E I S LAN D AV E., N.W. WAS HIN GTO N , D.C. 2 0 00~7 01 www.nealrg r oss.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 1 5 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 21 solicit feedback from the people that everybody works with, and I was having trouble getting any kind of positive feedback on Bert. So, we had a conversation, ~l (b_)(7_)(_c) ______________________________________ ~!about well, could we maybe get somebody else in the RSOR position. Would that be possible? Is there some kind of education or something that Bert had that put him above and beyond everybody else, and I said not really. We could switch it up. You know, try something different, and kind of debated it back and forth. And he sa i d we ll, shou l d we maybe put something in his performance appraisal to go and say you have to be at these meetings or whatever, like the 6:30 supervisor meeting. And~said no, that's a little --I don't know, like a little heavy-handed or something, so we kind of left it a little nebulous, said we'll talk about it later, and that probably wasn't a great idea. And the next day I called Bert and said hey, look, the way you' re perceived at the site is not getting involved in some of the things that are going on. Like we're trying to --at the time, we were trying to get the onsite analytical laboratory on line and get them certified under the DOD eLab, and said I think it would help if you got involved in that. And he kind of wasn't happy about that, said I've got too much other (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1 323 RHODE ISLAND AV E., N.W. WAS H I NGT ON , O.C. 20005-3701 www.n ealrgross.com 1 2 J 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 22 stuff to do. And I said well, you know, just between you and me, within the company they're always lo oking for who's producing and contributing, and it doesn't help you not getting involved like that. So, we had a little bit of an issue. {b){7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT Was Bowers responsible for training --did he train you and kind of get you up to speed when you took over? L!(b_l{_7 l_{C_l __________ _.l I mean, he pointed m e out where certain projects were at and everything like that, yes. (b)(7)(C} SPECIAL AGENT : And he conducted the RSOR train ing on site for t he staff? ~l (b_)(n_(_c) ________ __.!: Between him and I bel ieve Ll (b-)(-7)-(C_l __________________________ _.j did the tra in ing at that time. (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT Did Bowers raise safety concerns to you? l (b)(7)(C) Yes, they were --a lot of them we re kind of minor in nature. You know, hey, we found this, the water cooler was i nside this RCA boundary which wasn't roped, so things like that. I'd say hey, look, go to the 7:00 meeting. Make sure that everybody is aware of where it's supposed to be, go and see if you can figure out how it got put there, (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE , N.W , WASHINGTON , D.C. 20005-3701 www .nealrgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 23 things like that. (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT So, more specifically, what issues did he raise, and when you recall him raising them? And this is kind of significant from a time line perspective, as best you can remember, or was this an all the time thing? l (b)(7)(C) I It was a periodic thing. 1 mean, like I said, I can't remember anything that he brought to me that was like oh, my goodness, this is a serious problem that we have to stop work right now and retrain people. SPECIAL AGENT l (b)(?)(C) So, you said the water cooler was inside a boundary of an RCA. Do you recall when that issue happened? l~(b_)(7_l (_ci __________ ~I: It was probably two years ago, something like that. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) Okay, roughly 2010? l (b)(7)(C) I= Right. Yes, and there would be things like well, hey, signs were down. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(7)(C) Postings. l (b)(7)(C) I: Right. Again, that's just something that --you know, a day-to-day thing that the RCTs were supposed to be keeping their eyes on and taking care of, and putting up. If you see it --(202) 234-4433 SPECIAL AGENT l (b)(?)(C) Are those things that NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHING T ON. D.C. 200()5.3701 www .nealrgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 1.5 16 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 24 --are those issues that warrant work stoppages? ~!(b_)(7_)(_C)~~~~---'!: No. No. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) : Did you document it when he brought it up to you? l (b)(7)(C) I I can't say that I did, because like I said, those were all pretty mi~or in nature. And other than --I mean, not written, but I mean verbally say SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) : So, what actions did you take when you received the information from Bert? _!(b_)(_7)_(c_)~~~~~~'= I gave him direction to go and bring it up at the 7:00 safety meeting, to go make sure that the water coolers aren't set inside the boundaries, and to go and see if he can track down who's in charge of putting those materials out, see if you could personally talk to the person. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) : Were you ever advised by other managers at Tetra Tech that Bowers raised safety-related concerns to them? If so, when and who? Anybody else in management ever say yes, Bert came to me and raised this issue? l (b)(7)(C) I No, I don't think so. SPECIAL AGENT ~: And would you say that his issues were legitimate nuclear safety issues, or were they more on the OSHA side of the house, or (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASH I NGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 25 was it a mixture? l (b)(7)(C) I would say, if anything, it might lean towards OSHA. Bue, I mean, a lot of them I don't even think were really legitimate safety concerns. I mean, like signs fall down, people have to put them back up. We're in a windy environment. I mean, things happen. That's why we had Rad contacts on site all the time to take care of those things. To me, an issue is rea l ly when somebody does something that could lead to an unsafe act or condition, or somebody on purpose goes against training, th i ngs of that nature. SPECIAL AGENT[____J: And are employees at Tetra Tech as i t relates to safety concerns, are employees encouraged to also go to RASO? ~!(b_Jm_(_C_) ________ __,!: They can. I guess in my view, chey're not really in our licensing chain. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) : NRC more so is than RASO. l (b)(7)(C) I ~-~~~~~~~~ =Right.Exactly, because , I mean, RASO is really in this particular instance, that branch of RASO is really the technical advisor for the Navy as far as did we take enough samples or whatever to clear this area? So, I mean, there's certainly no problem with anybody talking to RASO if (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCR IBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 they wanted to. I just don't think that they're in the particular chain from the person up through supervisor through r)(*X C l o the NRC. (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT : Now, are employees required to first discuss their issues with Tetra Tech management before going to any external entities? l (b)(7)(C) I: No, they're not required to. Like I said, we say we'd sure like it because that gives us an opportunity to go to try to correct any deficient conditions before going outside. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) : When Bowers worked for you, you wrote his ~r_m_ci-----------------------------' ~'(b-)(-7)(-C)----------'j

Yes. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C}

For what years? l (b)(7)(C) It was for 2009 and 2010. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?}(C) And do you recall what those --how he graded out? l (b)(7)(C) I .... --------------'

Yes. He did a lot better in 2009, in 2010 I guess he got mostly threes except for like, I thi nk r Xt)(C J like probably a two for pointing out safety stuff. Because like I said, he seemed to make a --to highlight even small stuff. (202) 234-4433 SPECIAL AGENT : What's the scale? l (b)(7)(C) I: Like a one to five. SPECIAL AGENT l (b)(7)(C) I= One NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 to five, one www.nealrgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 11 12 13 14 15 1 6 1 7 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 being? l (b)(7)(C) I ---------~

= Being SPECIAL AGENT l (b)(7){C) I= _!(b-)(7-)(c_i ______ ___.!: Yes. (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT (b)(7)(C) 27 good. Being the best. Five being the worst. ~------__,: Right. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) So, in 2009 did he get a lot of fives, fours? l (b)(7)(C) I ._ _______ __,: He got like more fours and stuff, yes. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) : Did he receive a --do you recall him getting a bonus for his performance? ... l (b-)(7)-(-C)-----, .... --------': Yes, but as a smaller percentage than others. (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT : Than other HPs? l (b)(7)(C) I _..._ ______ _,F Yes, than other HPs. Yes. r l(7 l(ci I Because L.----------.....J at the time, the other supervisors were doing a better overall job, I guess. SPECIAL AGENT LJ Did he get a bonus in 2010, as well? l (b)(l)(C) I ________ __,: Yes, well, 2009, 2010. Yes, he got something both years. IITTfflITT SPECIALAGENT L._ ___ J Okay. So, on his 2010 ap praisal, this is the year you're saying you guys had (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1 323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 28 problems with h im. Did you identify those problems in l (b)(7)(C) I ~--------~

No, I did not. Admittedly, I should have documented stuff better. I mean, I told him he needed to get more involved in the day-to-day production survey stuff, and the lab. And, unfortunately, I probably tend to be too sof t of a (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT : So, for al l intents and purposes, appraisals. he had fair to good performance l (b)(l)(C) I: Yes

• SPECI AL AGENT~: Where in both years he got a bonus. l (b)(7)(C) I Right. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) : A performance bonus of some sort. Okay. What employment action was later leveraged against Bowers and why? He ended up finally things kind of fizzled out, was he what actually--

-was he terminated, was he laid off, was he furloughed? l (b)(7)(C) I .... -------~: No. He was removed from the project at Hunters Point, and then we had him at the Alameda project, I want to say like eight weeks. And then when the three-shift coverage for the dredging (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3101 www.nealrgross .com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 3 14 15 16 1 7 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 29 operations ended, we took him off that project, and while we were looking for other work, we gave him like an opportunity to work in the Saudi al Karish job, which he didn't want to do that. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(7)(C) In Saudi Arabia. l (b)(7)(C) I Correct. Right. And we there was another very short-term like safety job I think --(b)(7)(C) Was that the one in SPECIAL AGENT L-~---' Oak Ridge? l~b)(7)(C) I Well, Michigan. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) Michigan. l (b)(7)(C) I : And he wasn't interested in t hat one. And then l (b)(7)(C) l had talked to him at Oak Ridge about the Oak Ridge thing, and apparently he didn't want to do that either. SPECIAL l (b)(7)(C) I AGENT '-* _ __,: So, why was he removed from the Hunters Point project? l (b)(7)(C) I Because he went and --I guess the way we kind of viewed it was he instigated an argument with health physics supervisors, and for the l (b)(7)(C) !that was kind of the straw that broke the camelrs back, I guess. Because it was a little bit of a microcosm of what the problem with Bert was with not getting involved with day-to-day (202) 234-443 3 NEA L R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCR I BERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 2000~701 www.nealrgross .com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 30 operations because he had been asked to go and show up at the 6:30 meeting, so instead of going and bringing up problems that he saw at his end of the day drive down, he could get involved in the act~al planning of events with the other health physics supervisors. So, if somebody was going to bring up something that for some reason would not be safe, Bert could interject and say that's a bad idea. We're not going to do that, o r whatever. But he showed up and --I guess he showed resistance on coming i n for those earlier meetings because that was going to take away from his end of the day drive down. SPECIAL AGENT Was the end of the day drive down part of in his job description ? l (b)(7)(C) I: No, it's not SPECIAL AGENT (b)(7)(C) : Or was that k i nd of an ancillary thing he created? down come l (b)(7)(C) I ..... _____ __,: Yes. (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT How did that drive l (b)(7)(C) I ..... _______ ...J: It' s something he 1 iked to do. I mean, it's a good (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT Practice. !(b)(?J (C) j: Yes, it's a good practice to go and check at the end of the day. I mean, (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON , D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 1 6 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 31 personally, I think it's a little bit better to go out there during the middle of the day so you can observe things as they're going on, so you can catch people being good and say like, you know, keep on doing things th is way, or I see you <;loing this. Let's go and tighten this up, and opposed to going at the end of the day where you don't have people around, you don't have context for what's gone on. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C)

Do you know what he was looking for by going at the end of the day when the employees were gone? l (b)(7)(C) I _________

..,= Yes. He said he was lo oking for things like, you know, signs being down, which again we already --at the time we still have l (b)(7)(C) I (b)(7)(C) an d Susan Andrews doing that like every week anyway, so it wasn't like that wasn't covered. But I guess he's looking also for gates being locked and things like that. So, it's not a bad thing to do. It's certainly not in his job description, certainly not mandatory, certainly not something I said you have to do this every day. r (7)(C)1 SPECIAL AGENT l________J Righ t. So, was l (b)(7)(C) the one who ultimately made the determination to cut him off the project at Hunters Point? (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE I SLAND AV E., N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 32 l (b)(7)(C) I ~--------~ = Correct. l (b)(7)(C) I SPECIAL AGENT.: Okay And that was because he just was --he felt that he was unhappy with Bert, or it was because of the argumenc that started after the morning meeting? l (b)(7)(C) L ~--------~f Right. He was already on edge. I mean, we talked in October I think it was, like could we switch it up? Like what we are going to do about Bert SPECIAL AGENT~: This is October of? ""l (b"""")(7""')(=c) _____ I _: Of 2010. SPECIAL AGENT l (b)(7')(CJ I: 2010. 1:~: Hn: (: c)::::::::::L Right. Right. Right. So, a couple of months before January when the inc ident happened. So, t her e was already --SPECIAL AGEN T (b)(l)(C)

• Tension. l (b)(7)(C) I= _ . tension there. And I thin k that t h is was kind of the straw that broke the camel's back. it with who? (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT ,__ _ __, Okay. And he got into ._l (b-)(7-)(C-) ____ _,I: We ll, based on the interviews I had, he --I guess I'll try to start at the beginning, but from what Bert then said, l (b)(l)(C)

~ad come in the night before to talk to him about how his (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE .* N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 1 2 3 4 s 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1 7 1 8 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 33 hours were going to be reduced because we're going from a cost-reimbursable contract to a fixed price contracc so we had to kind of shrink hours. And Bert wasn't really happy about that , and then he said --he went out and did his drive down and at the time he saw people coming out of an RCA without any rad supervision there. So, he went and came back and told (b)(7)(C) and then I guess (b)(?)(C) said talk to the supervisors the next day about that. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) The next morning. l (b)(7)(C) I ._ _______ __,= And I should say one thing that a little bit bothers me about this is that if Bert really thought that somebody was coming out of a radiologically controlled area, as a rad safety professional what he spould have done at that point was say a l l you guys co ming out of ther e , you know, stop. I've got to go get an instrument to go and frisk you because you might be tracking out contamination all over the place, and also like get some background on what were you guys doing, were you digging? I need to know what's going on. SPECIAL AGENT EJ: Figure out what's going on. l (b)(7)(C) I .... ______ __,: Yes, because this might be a big situation, you know. (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON, O.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 1 4 15 16 1 7 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 34 SPECIAL AGENT~: From what Bert told you, did he do that? ! ... (b_)(7_)(_c) ____ ___.!: No, no. From what: Bert told me, he said he like asked them like well, what are you guys doing here? It was like well, we' re working overtime, and we're going. And then they left, so he (b)(7)(C) (b)(7)(C) werit and told , and said get the supervisors. And then the next day Bert showed up for the 6 : 3 0 supervisors meeting, but he went to the wrong location because he's never gone before. And then he wen t and grabbed the supervisors to go and tell them that hey, there wasn't somebody with an authorized user, one of the health physics supervisors on site, so that would have been an NRC violation in his mind. And then I forget who , it might have been l (b)(l)(C) p r ....._ __ (b)(7)(C) said well, what area are you talking about? SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) r)(7)(C) I* l (b)(l)(C) I: l (b)(7)(C)

1. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) Or l (b)(7)(C)

I. l (b)(l)(C) I: l (b)(7)(C) l correct. And then said show me on the map. And it was the UC-3 cor ridor , and they went and I guess all the supervisors said that's already --that area has already been cleared. We already have all of our samples back. We already have surveys back. We got (202) 234--4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON , D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 35 approval from RASO to go and backfill. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) So, that area had been released. l (b)(7)(C) I _..._ _____ __,: Right. Right. Right. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) : Okay. ... !(b_)(_7)(_C_) ____ __,!: So, that's essentially just putting dirt back in a hole, and anybody can do that. And we have reams of documentation to back that up. But at this point, I guess, Bert got a little irate and said like I knew you'd say that. So, an argument continued, and then I guess~ showed up after he heard the commotion and said what's going on here? And I think Bert described well, hey, somebody wasn't here when they were backfilling over here in UC-3. And (b){l){C) said well, wait a minute, that area has already been cleared. Let's break this meeting up, or whatever. And then I think there was some more arguing in the hall . (b){7)(C) or something. And then went over to his office, and then Bert fol lowed in afterwards and said he wasn' t supporting him, and like depend ing on whose version, either Bert said he was going to quit, or said do you want me to quit? And I'll never know who said what. (b)(7){C) (b)(7) SPECIAL AGENT : Right . So' (C) never admitted to wanting Bert to tell him --Bert to quit, (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSC RIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON , D.C. 20005-3701 www.n ealrgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 36 or telling him that he would take his resignation? !(b)(l)(C) l: Yes. I mean, l (b)(l)(C) I said that Bert said he was going to quit and~said fine, you know, go ahead and quit. (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT : Go ahead and quit. .__ _ __. l (b)(7)(C) I ________ ___.: Do whatever. And then Bert (b)(7)(C) said something about calling the NRC, and the n ,__ __ _, said something like call whoever you want but you're not doing it from my phone, or the project' s phone, or something like that. (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT : So, was Bert aware of the performance prob le ms you were having with hi m? l (b)(?)(C) I ---------J

Yes, only --SPECIAL AGENT E:J: I know you didn' t document it. l (b)(7)(C) I __ ------~: Right. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) I know that didn't, so he didn't sign anything, there were no annotations in his appraisal.

Did you verbalize the concerns to him? r .__)(-7)-(C_J ____ __.I: Yes. No, I verbalized them. I definitely verbalized them to him. I mean, he was aware --SPECIAL AGENT l (b)(7)(C) I: occasions, regularly? (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON, D , C. 20005-3701 On how many www.nealrgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 3 11 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 37 l (b)(7)(C) I Two phone cons I had with him, the first one was around October, and the second one was around when he signed his performance appraisal around December. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) Of 2010. l (b)(7)(C) I Yes. Or maybe it was the end of November. But whenever his --it was a coup l e of days I think after he signed it, whenever. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?J(C) Okay. Did site management there at Hunters Point identify to you that Bowers was a trouble maker and he wasn't looked upon in a favorable l ight? l (b)(7)(C) I Well, yes, that he was n't looked upon --I mean, he had a reputation of I guess trying to catch other people in like gotcha kind of situations, as opposed to being proactive, like I said getting involved with the planning stages of things. I mean, when I came on to site to go and investigate wha t happened, I was having trouble finding anybody could really say much nice about him, unfortunately. And I mean not just management, but rad contaccs and other workers. SPECIAL AGENT l (b)(7)(C) !: Did he have a reputation as somewhat of a cbmplainer? (202) 234-4433 l (b)(7)(C) I Yes, definitely. I mean, NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON , D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross .com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 1 5 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 38 from the time I got there he kind of had a thing that he didn't get enough respect, or that I guess he didn't like !(!i)(?)(C) !management style, or whatever. (b)(?)(C) SPECIAL AGENT : Had Bowers ever been placed on a PIP or any other form of progressive discip li ne? l (b)(7)(C) I __ No. No. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(T)(C) : Are you aware of any other employees at Hunters Point that raised safety-related concerns and were later laid off or let go? l (b)(7)(C) I: No. SPECIAL AGENT l (b)(7)(C) I= You said you conducted the inte rna l investigation when Bowers raised his issues. l (b)(7)(C) I: Right. SPECIAL AGENT l (b)(7)(C) I= Did you end up producing a report of all your findings and so forth? l (b)(7)(C) I Yes. Well, I had a tech memo that I wrote saying that from the documentation that area was already cleared, so it was no SP ECIAL AGENT !(b)(7)(C) !: Okay. I'm going to ---that will be one of the documents I'll need to get from you guys. MR. MURPHY: Yes. I' 11 talk to l (b)(7)(C) l and see exac tly what document he's talking about. (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASH I NGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1 7 18 1 9 20 21 22 23 24 25 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) MR. MURPHY: Okay. 39 Okay, not a problem. l (b)(7)(C) I It's just a one-page document basically saying SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) Did you highlight who you interviewed and what the disclosure of those interviews were? l (b)(7)(C) I I'd have to go look at it. I don't know that I did. at it. (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT.__~__. You could take a look l (b)(7)(C) I I mean, I could tell you the primarily, I got the information l (b)(7)(C) who runs the database, and f ro m l (b)(7)(C) I who is the l (b)(7)(C) ! for that area to go and look at t he emails generated given approvals from RASO to go backfill. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) : Okay. And what' s the requirement at Hunters Point for rad surveys for employees to complete , like if they're in an area and they have to always survey out, they survey sometimes, do they have to use a particular device? What's the -if there is an overarching rad protect.ion concept or requirement? ~l'b-)(7_)(_c) __________ .....i!: Right. If anybody is (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS CO URT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nea l rgross.com l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 40 leaving an RCA they'll have a rad contact survey them out with a frisker, a Ludlum 23, well, the 44 9 detector. (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT So, do you always have a rad HP tech there at the entry and exit point of those areas posted there to get everybody coming in and out? l (b)(7)(C) I --~~~~~~__,= Correct, if it's st.ill a radiologically controlled area. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) Okay. l (b)(7)(C) I If it's not anymore, then we wouldn't. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) : Okay. _, (b-)(-l)-(C-)~~~~__,!= I mean, it's SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) Al l the techs that you have, are they kind of --are they certified rad and HP techs , or do you have laborers or somebody else doing that job of frisking people and running surveys? l (b)(?)(C) !: I mean, we have technicians who are trained. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C)

• Trained. l .... (b-)(7-)(C_J ____ ...,!: Right . SPECIAL AGENT l (b)(7)(C) everybody has been HPRP trained. Okay. Because _!(b-)(_7J_(c_)~~~~~-'~ Right. We give them some (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCR IBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nea!rgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 3 14 1 5 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 41 training.

I mean, there's not like a certificate saying this person (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT .__ __ _. l (b)(7)(C) I ~----------'

Right. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) You complete --Do you believe that Bowers was retaliated against for raising safety-related concerns?

... l (b-)(-7)(-C l ____ __,!= No. SPECIAL AGENT l (b)(?)(C) !: Have there been problems on site at Hunters Point regarding postings being utili z ed and adhered to, the rad post i ngs? Has there been a p r oblem with the fact that those are up and that people are abiding by them? l (b)(7)(C) !: I mean, there are pr o bab l y i nstances where somebody did not go and pay at t ention t o them, but i t's not something that was prevalent. You kn o w, unfortunately we dea l with human beings and no t everybody always plays by the rules , so I c an't say 10 0 per c ent of the time. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) : Are corners being cut by construct i on emp l oyees and others at Hunters Point as it relates to conducting rad surveys? l (b)(7)(C) I ~----------J

No. I mean --SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) Did Bowers bring that up to you? Yes, I mean, essentially, is Hunters Point (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 42 operating purely as a const ruct ion site, and kind of ignoring the rad component and the rad requirements?

l (b)(7)(C) I .... _______ _,: No. I mean, in fact, that* s one of the things that we have so many steps, checks in place before somebody can backfill. I mean, that's the whole thing. We have a data management base. I mean, if in my investigation I found out that we didn't have the samples to prove that we had an area cleared, and that we didn't have RASO concurrence to backfill, I mean, we would have had a b i g situation and l wou l d have said Bert is absolutely right, but that's not the situation. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(7)(C) Are employees insuring t he safekeeping of all equipment in workrelated areas and material where rad --in rad concentrated areas? I believe we heard some testimony, and it was raised that other equipment had been left out, a gate had been left open one night in a rad area. Is that common? Have those issues been addressed? l (b)(7)(C) I .... -----------l

I don' t know that it ' s common. I mean, sometimes we have like copper miners or something will go and cut locks and go into areas after hours. But, again, I wouldn't say it's common. (202) 234-4433 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) Was there pressure NEAL A. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON.

D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1 7 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 43 placed on jobs by construction personnel to get things done quickly at the expense of rad protection? ~l (b-)(_7)_(c_J----------~I

Not at the expense of rad protection, no. Obviously, the efficiency of the project is important to go get things done as quickly and safely as possible.

SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) : Did Bowers develop a reputation as a stickler for the rules? And, if so, did that impact his interaction with personnel on site? l (b)(7)(C) l ----------------~ Well, he appeared to be a stickler for his own interpretation of rules, which was very flexible, you know, depending on the s i tuation. I mean, a classic example is when I came to do the investigation, he'd get upset by okay, we had this water cooler slightly inside this boundary. And then I go into his cabinet and he's got radioactive sources right next to food. SPECIAL AGENT~: Was that the cesium, the issue with the cesium button in a jar? l (b)(7)(C) I ~-----------------'

Well, that was actually a radium button in a jar. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) : Radium. ! ~(b_)(_7)_(c_)----------~I

But that was something that was separate.

This was when I came to (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WAS H INGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 44 invest igate what went on. I also did like a 100 percent audit of everything. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) What monch was chat? What month and year was that? l (b)(?)(C) I ~------------

That SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) was January of 2011. : 2011. ._!(b_)(_7)(_C_) ____ __,l Right. So, the week after this incident happened, because I had to figure out what happened, who was in the right, who was in the wrong. And I wanted to make sure that there w asn't anything else wrong. But he had that radium button source and some other check sources --SPECIAL AGENT {b)(?)(C)

Wasn' t he using those for training and l (b)(7)(C) I ... _______ _,= Yes. He was using the radium button source for trainin g. I mean, there's not a problem with having the sources. I mean, that's fine. (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT : Okay. l (b)(7)(C)

I ._ _______ __, f It's just --it's not good l (b){?)(C) I ~----------' practice to have them by food. SPECIAL AGENT l (b)(?)(C) Right. l (b)(7)(C) I ~---------'

The same reason that you don't want to go and have water in a RCA. (202) 234-4433 SPECIAL AGENT l (b)(7)(C) I: Right. NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRAN SCRIB ERS 132 3 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrg ross.com 1 2 3 4 s 6 7 8 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 45 l (b)(7)(C)

I So, it's just a little it's hard for me to reconcile saying like you guys are be ing al 1 bad because you've got this thing slightly inside this boundary, but it's okay for me to have radioactive sources next to food. (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT : Next to food. Right. l (b)(7)(C) !: So, that' s where it was a little hard for me to marry those two together. SPECIAL AGENT l (b)(7)(C) I= Now, was that the issue you self-reported to the NRC, was his --because I believe an inspection was done and the only thing that came up was a self-reported identification by you all. l (b)(7)(C) I --~~~~~~~~

Right.That was the radium button source. That was probably like nine months before that. He left it out in the main conference room during lunch, so that got identified as a deficiency notice, and so we self-identified that to the NRC. The issue about having sources in the same locker as his food, that was one of my findings during the audit so, I mean, that --I guess you could say chat's self-identified, but that's not something that the NRC wrote in their inspection report. SPECIAL AGENT~ Now, was that t:urned in --was that self-reported by you all because you (202) 234-4-433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHOD E ISLAND AVE ** N.W. WASHINGTON, O.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21. 22 23 24 25 46 guys were kind of at odds with Bert, and because it was Bert that this occurred with? Would it have been --if it was another employee would it still have been reported?

l (b)(7)(C) I Oh, yes. Yes, certainly it would have been reported. It had nothing to do with who it was, nothing like that. If I would have done it, I would have gotten a deficiency notice, as well. I mean, yes. I don't think it's the end of the world. I mean, he was very sorry for having d one it. (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT : Was there any adverse act ion placed o r leverage d against him because of this issue with the button? ~l (b_)(_7)_(c_) __________ ~l: __ N_o~. No, absolutely not. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) : Were you privy to any conversations with management, with Tetra Tech management regarding Bowers' safety concerns and his vocal nature regarding safety? Did management have a call and say look, this --we've got to do something about t his guy because he's just --were you ever in any of those conversations, did you have access to some of that knowledge? l (b)(7)(C) I No. I mean, like I said, th e only thing was that he had a reputation for going and doing gotcha type stuff in his drive downs. And (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.neaJrgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 11 1 2 1 3 14 15 16 l7 18 19 20 2 1 22 23 24 25 47 making maybe a mountain out of a molehi l l. And he also had a reputation for not getting involved on the front on how projects were going to be worked out. So, I (b)(7)(C) mean --because, I guess, even earlier had asked him if he could move his office so he would be over on l (b)(l)(C) I and (b)(7)(C) the same side of the trailer as where ___ .... and he are, because --(b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT L-r_)(-7)(_C_) --...I' and r'(l)(C) ~'(b_)(7_)(C_J ____ ~l: Right. So, t hat --because a lot of t i mes the project things are sort of fluid o r whatever, so i f a problem comes up --SPECIAL AGENT You can go right t here. l (b)(7)(C) I ..... -------....1 = Just g o right there and let's --typically, !(b)(l)(C) !grabs people and brings them in the office, so he was hoping that well, hey, if Bert were over there i n that same vicinity, there would be a natural inclination like kind of second i n t he of f ice t o get involved. And Bert resisted that because he said he needed to be the public relations l (b)(7)(C) I guy for _______ ~because he was difficu l t to deal with with other people. So, Bert SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) Who is~l (b-)(7J_(c_) __ ~!? (202) 234-4433 l (b)(7)(C) I 1-_______ __,: He's the lab director for N E AL R. G R OSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTO N , D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 a 9 1.0 11 12 13 14 15 l. 6 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 48 the gamma spec lab. So, Bert had a tendency to sort of have an excuse for changing anything, didn't want to change his office, didn'c want to change the drive down. It's sort of like it's my way. I know the way, the only way how to do it, and everybody else Yes. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) : Stand back. ._l (b)-(7)-(C)------'I: needed to stand back. SPECIAL AGENT L_ __ j= How often did you travel out to Hunters Point? ... l (b_)(_7)_(c_) _____ -1I= Probably once every six weeks. SPECIAL AGENT l (b)(7)(C) I: Are Tetra Tech employees out at Hunters Poi nt embodied by rad protection guidelines? l (b)(7)(C) Yes. Yes. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(7)(C) Were you ever instructed by Tetra Tech management to not document Bowers' concerns when he raised them to you? l (b)(7)(C) I '---------~ = Absolutely not. I mean, if anything, Tetra Tech actually looks more favorably to go and report anything that you see amiss. I mean, they like to see people bringing up issues. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) Do you know what the current status what Bowers' current employment (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GR OS S COUR T REPORTERS AND TRANSCR I BERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WAS H INGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 49 status is with the company? ~~-K_rn_c_1~~~~~~ As far as I know he's still an employee of the company, and if we find work Lha t he has the knowledge, skills, and ability to do and he wants to go take the position, he'd be able to take the position. Thus far, he's chosen not to. Again, when I went out there to go and investigate , I tried to figure out how can we use him somewhere, and he basically said he's not accepting anything other than working at Hunters Point, and~!(b_)(_7)_(c_1~~~~~~_,!got to g o. And I'm l ike, you know SPECIAL AGENT (b)(7)(C) Was there any consideration of sending h im back to Hunters Po i nt? '~(b-J(_7 1_(c_1~~~~~~': Well, we had talked abou t it, but only very briefly because in my estimat io n i t would have been a very bad idea, because like I said, he didn't have any respect of the workers there. I mean, he even refused to go and help in the investigation. I mean, he came in and talked to me for about an hour when we went to the site, and then I explained that lik e, well, on the surface what I'm hearing is, I haven't had a chance to look at the paperwork but this area has already been cleared, and I don't see any RCA postings on it. And he said well, you know, you can understand where I'd ~e confused (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www .neatrgross .com l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 1 8 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 50 because of the fencing, because the fencing is still up, because for safety, because you don't want to let somebody walk in --SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) : Right . l (b)(7)(C) I _,__ ______ _,F --and fa ll into a 12-foot ditch. SPECIAL AGENT E:]: And it's still posted as a rad area. l (b)(7)(C) I _,__ ______ __,: It was not. SPECIAL AGENT l (b)(7)(C) l So, the fence was up but there was no posting oh it. l (b)(7)(C) I ~-------~: Co rrect. Correct. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) : Okay. Now, there was a ll these problems with postings often blowing off because of the w i nd, and this and that. So, was it conceiva ble to bel i eve that he wou ld struggle to differentiate the two because that's a common them e there? l (b)(7)(C) No, because again we hav e like one of those areas, we have a sign like every 30 feet. SPECIAL AGENT __ __,: Okay. l (b)(7)(C) So, that would --you'd have to have --I mean, we're talking probably 80 signs would have to fall off. And, again, we have (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE I SLAND AVE., N.W. WASHiNGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 wwW .nealrgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 a 9 1.0 11 1 2 13 1 4 15 16 17 1 8 1 9 20 21 22 23 24 25 51 technicians who are going on a weekly basis going to each area, going sign, sign, sign, sign , so SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) : Is there a check l ist that they have to turn in and state that they checked all the --... !(b_J(_7 l (_c_) ____ __,!: They send me a weekly Exce l spreadsheet with the initials of the person who checked that particular area. (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT ,__~--s-Okay. l (b)(7)(C) I s h , d t h .... o , t ere s a --an ere may be even an actual che c klist. There's also a board, a status board on the inside of the front side of the o f fice where they have the RCAs and everything mapped off. So, again, this is what's a little weird to me. If Bert's doing a drive down every day and he's checking the postings, then he should be aware that there's been a change in the postings. (b)(7)(C) SP E CIAL AGENT : Right . l (b)(7)(C) I .... And if something was there and it had 80 signs on one day and the next day there's none, that would have been the time for me to go like why did w e de-post that? (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT Right. l (b)(7)(C) I So, that's a lit t le weird that he wouldn't even have picked up on that (20 2) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE IS LAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealr gmss.co m l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1 7 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 52 previously. (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT Now, is it ever disseminated amongst all the employees about the posting changes? Does that occur in the morning meetings, does that occur to be an email to everybody? How does that --when an area is cleared and you're moving on, and there's been matriculation of things, are all those things discussed in a particular format? l (b)(7)(C) I Well, they're annotated on that status board. I can't swear that it's like always brought up in a safety meeting, but I think generally speaking it's brought up that there's a change. And there's also an understanding from people that when somebody says we got approval from RASO to backfill, we' 11 be backfilling over in this area, everybody k i nd of understands that that means that the area has been cleared. l (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT~.~~~ Now, a lot of this wou l d be talked about at the safety meetings that Bert wasn't going to , or was going to? l (b)(7)(C) I Well, he wasn't --he definitely wasn't going to the 6:30 supervisor meeting. (202) 234-4433 SPECIAL AGENT Right. l (b)(7)(C) I: And from what I understand NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCR IB ERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross .com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ll 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 53 maybe he was going 50 percent of the time, the 7:00 safety meeting, which is where all of the --cpECIAL AGENT (b){l)(C) S h

• o ,__ _ __.: o, t e supervisors meet first at 6:30 and then at 7:00 l (b)(l)(C) I Right. (b){7)(C)

SPECIAL AGENT So, they meet at 6: 3 O, get their heads together and make sure everybody is on the same page, and at 7:00 they disseminate the information to the employees for the day. l (b)(7)(C) I Correct. Right. (b}(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT So, Bert about 50 percent of t he time went to the 7:00 meeting, hardly ever went to the management meeti ng. ._!(b_)(_7 l (_c) ____ ___,!: From what I understand now he absolutely never went. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C)

Okay. And was that in his job description to attend those meetings?

Was it written in there, do you know? l (b)(7)(C) I No, it was not in the job description. It's one of those things I would have expected him to have done. You know, because again that's where you come up with the plan of the day, and if in Bert's mind he ought to be involved in every rad decision and everything, that would be one of the main focal points where you can be involved in that. (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RH ODE IS LAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3101 www.nealrgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 l. 7 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 (b)(?)(C) SPECIAL AG E NT'---__,-54 And you conveyed that to him that you wanted him to start going? l (b)(?)(C) No, I di d not. I was nol that he was not going. It (b)(?)(C) who brought aware was it up I think the day before the blowup was that, you know, hey, I need you to start going to the 6 : 3 0 supervisor meetings. Because, again, talking to (b)(?)(C) and !(b)(?)(C) L what was happening --I guess I should back up a little bit. All right. Again, since we're on a fixed price project, we only have a certain amount of technicians or whatever. SPECIAL AGENT l (b)(?)(C) l Right. ... !(b_)(?)_(_ci ____ ___,!: So , on a day-to-day job . l (b)(7)(C) I tasking,_ trn ight need three technicians for doing ----(b)(7)(C) his trench work, and might need two or three ..._ __ _, technicians for doing something at building. (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT : Right. l (b)(7)(C) ! ~--------J f And at the time Bert might need one or two technicians to survey materials and equipment, or some t hing like that. So, that's the time to kind of go hey, I need somebody from your crew or whatever. (202) 234-4433 (b)(?)(C) SPECIAL AGENT : Right. l (b)(?)(C) I ~--------~ = So, the supervisors w ere NEAL R. GROSS COURT REP O R T E RS AN D TRAN SCR IBE RS 1 323 RHOD E ISLAND AV E., N.W. WAS H I N GT ON , D.C. 20005-3 7 01 www.nea l rgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 55 having their planning done and saying we l l, I've got my crews and everything. Then they'd send people off to start their jobs, and then Bert would like send an email like at 8:00 saying well, I need two of your technicians for doing something for base wide. So, that was becoming a prob le m because you can't just--SPECIAL AGENT l (b)(?)(C) Yes, it was throwing things off. l (b)(7)(C) I Right, because we already had a meeting to plan stuff, and now you're saying I can't do whatever we were going to do. So, that's what led to that. Like I said, it wasn't something I had ever asked like, you know, are you going to these meetings? Because I just assumed SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) Assumed that he was. ~l (b-)(_7)_(c_i~~~~~~I= I assumed that he was. I mean, it's a p rudent thing to do. He's a supervisor also. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C)

And nobody else from Tetra Tech management had said hey, you know, Bert is not --sending emails today, we need --maybe he should come to meetings to talk to him? l (b)(7)(C)

I b d No, no o y no. I wish that something more direct like that --I mean, people had like said some things like well, Bert is not (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AV E., N.W. WAS HINGT ON, D.C. 20005-3701 www .nealrgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 56 involved or whatever, but it's not like they were looking to get him involved, you know, to a certain extent. SPECIAL l (b)(7)(C) AGENT . When you guys switched from a cost-reimbursable to a fixed cost, did chat subsequently result in Bert losing some money? Was he no longer getting as many hours? .... l'b-)(7-)(C_) ____ ___JI: Well, from what I understand, initia lly Bert was going to go back I th ink maybe from 50 hours a week to 45. l (b)(7)(C) I SPECIAL AGENT. .: Right. l (b)(7)(C) I Which is stil l overcime, but then I guess --I think that it worked out that as long as Bert took a certain number of weeks of vacation that it was still going to be pretty close to whatever he was do i ng before. (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT : Did it --was there .__ _ __, any inference that he began to make mountains out of molehills and so forth after this happened with the contract and his hours getting cut? Was there any correlation to that? l (b)(7)(C) I Well, I mean, in that --I mean, to me it kind of seems like from Bert's own . l (b)(7)(C) I . testimony when said hey, I'm going to have to cut your hours that i t seems to me that Bert went out on (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AV E., N.W. WASHINGTON, O.C. 20005-3701 www.nea l rgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 57 a drive down almost intent on finding something to say--SPECIAL AGENT~: This is why I need to be here for the other hours. ~b_H_7)_(c_)-------------~ Exactly. So, if I weren't here, we would have been in this big problem. So, that's why I need to do this. And, again, I think one of the things that's a little frustrating to me, there are ways that this could have been worked out. He still could have done a drive down. He still could have gone to the 6: 30 meeting and had a slightly shortened drive down or something like that. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) : Right. l (b)(7)(C) I ~-----------------1 So, there are ways around this, so I don't know, it's a li ttle frustrating to me. (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT : So, was that how he got out of the morning meetings by saying that I need to start later so that I can do the drive downs and not exceed the hours? l (b)(7)(C) Yes. See, I don't know that anything was ever verbalized or discussed with anybody, but I --you know, I think that's probably what he thought in his mind. And, again, that's just me taking a guess. (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE .* N.W. WASHINGTON , O.C. 20005-3701 wwW.nealrgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 1 5 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 58 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) Do you believe that he was --at any point he became a target for the construction personnel and so forth on site, and other even HPRP folks once he began to bring those issues up, what he thought were big issues? Did he kind of become a target at that point? l (b)(7 J (C) I: No . He again, he worked there for New World Technology for a long time before that, and from what I understand he was essentially the Human Resources guy, so he was in charge of hiring and firing people. SPECIAL (b)(7)(C) AGENT ._ _ __.: Right. -"°-)(7)-(-C) ____ ___,!: So' there was a lot of bad blood from that, so I don't know that --I mean, a lot of these technicians had been working there for a good many years, so there are some issues from I guess he kept files on people on what they were doing after hours, like whether they were drinking or so me thing like that, so there was that kind of tension. SPECIAL AGEN T (b)(l)(C) Okay. A couple of closing comments. Actually, Mr. Murphy, do you have anything? MR. MURPHY: I just want to make sure that we are going to provide you with what you wanted. And h (b)(7)(C) wen (202) 234-4433 as talking about --NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE .. N.W. WASHINGTON, O.C. 20005-3701 www.nea f rgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 59 l (b)(7)(C) I _.__~~~~~~~-'

Yes, I have like it's a one-page memo bas i cally saying I looked at, you know, things, the email records, and the survey records that that part icular work area had been down posted. So, I can get you a copy of that. MR. MURPHY: I just wanted to make sure we had that nailed down. (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT ,__~~ Okay. Yes, you guys can coordinate and then you can get that over to me electronically or hard mail, either way. MR. MURPHY: The only other thing that I think is relevant, if I might, is that_l (b-)(-7)-(C_l~~~~~~ was involved in a drive around the job s i te w ith Mr. Bowers following when he went out to Hunters Point. l (bJ(l)(C)

I y t 11 th ' es, ac ua y, ere s a couple of things. If you don't mind me kind of explaining. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) No, let's discuss those things. l (b)(7)(C) I When I initially went out, because I think this incident happened maybe on a Thursday, and I flew out Sunday to go and investigate it. You know, after that initial looking at the area and saying like well, you know, I've got to go check the records but it looks kind of odd. I don't see any (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISIJ\ND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON , D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross .com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 60 postings, and he kind of said okay, well, you could see where I'd be confused. At that point, you know, I said can you go and wr ite down your recollection of events and everything, because that's important because I'm doing that to everybody. You know, l (:i)(?)(C) got to do it, the supervisor' s got to do it and everything. He said well, I don't feel comfortable doing it here because I feel intimidated, so can I go home. I said okay , you know, that's fine, whatever. And it took him more than two days to go and finish his events. And meanwhile, you know, he like refused to come i n when I'm trying to go and investigate if there's anything else going on. I asked h i m point blank --SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) So, he stayed home for the two days. .... !(b_)(7)_(c_) ____ ___,!= Yes. Well, he actually stayed home for Monday, Tuesday, WednesdayJ and Thursday he came in again for another hour, because I said I'm trying to do an audit and I can't find the TLD records. I can't find the inventory records, you know. Help me out here. And then when he was there, I said, you know, can you tell me any other issues, because if there are, I've got to know about them, and we've got to figure out what we've got to do. And he (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 1 4 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 61 said, you know, there aren't any other issues. I wouldn't do that to you. So, this is where it's a little bit frustrating for me because at the one hand I'm inferring that there's --he's saying there's all sorts of stuff that was brought up that somehow we brushed under the rug, but I'm getting time to go and actually have document on the record. And if for some reason I didn't docume nt stuff on the front end, let's fix it now. And I kind of got resistance. And in the audit, I mean, there were a number of things that he wasn't doing that he could have done better, too. (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT Can we get a copy of that audit, as well? l (b)(7)(C) I ,* . . Yes. Sure. SPECIAL AGENT!(b)(?)(C) !: Okay. Yesr Tim, L_J said that he could provide t hat, as well. So, I'll look to get a copy of that audit from you all, also. MR. MURPHY: And that's the self-audit in which we --in which you made the nine findings. Correct,~? ""'l (b...,)(7 .... )(-C)-----1. Right. Correct. SPECIAL AGENT l (b)(l)(C) Okay. So, the drive down, you guys did the drive down together. (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AV E., N.W. WASHINGTON, O.C. 2000~3701 www.nealrgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 62 l (b)(7 l(C) I Well, yes. And this was actually --well, at that point since he had somewhere else to go because he was going to go talk to a lawyer l (b)(7)(CI or something, he couldn't do it that day.~------' and I came out again I think the week after that maybe, so we could talk to him. And, again, I'm still trying to get the TLD records from him. And (b)(?)(C) and I took him on a drive down of the site saying well, you know, like point out all the things that are wrong that we needed to fix. SPECIAL AGENT r)(n (C) I= That you see, that you talked about. l (b)(7)(C) I .... ______ __,: Right. And he --we went on the drive down and he pointed out things well, like once I found this gate open like six years ago, or once I found an unlocked generator over here. So, I mean, he brought up --he gave us a history of what he had found in the past, but none of those items w as it something that well, somebody was blatantly on purpose 1 ike not doing something, or we had prevented somebody from doing a safe thing. It was. just that sometimes people --you know, when you' re there for eight years, somebody forgets to go and lock something, or they don't verify they locked it, or whatever. So , there wasn't anything that he could point out that was --(202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1 323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHI N GTON, 0.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.oom 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 63 that we're not doing right. SPECIAL AGENT !(b)(l){C) ! : Was there any documentation of that drive down after you guys completed it? Did you write something up, or notes taken --l (b)(7)(C) I ~----------'

No.No, we didn't. I mean, I did at the time like a scrap paper kind of thing, but not anything I held on to. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) : Do you know if (b)(?)(C) (b)(7)(C) had taken any special notes or anything after the ._ _ ___, drive down? !._(b_){7)_(_c) _____ _,l: I don' t think he did either. I mean, he was driving. (b)(7)(C)

SPECIAL AGENT Oh. l (b)(7)(C) I _________ _,: And I think this was actually on a --we were on th e way to lunch together, I think, so again it wasn't (b)(7 J(C) How long did that SPECIAL AGENT drive down last? 45 minutes. drove --(202) 234-4433 l (b)(7){C) I ~--------~

I want to say a half hour, (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT Okay. l{b){7)(C) L .... _______ _,f I mean, we pretty much SPECIAL AGENT l{b)(7)(C) I= The entire --NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 200~701 www.nealrgross.com 1 2 3 4 s 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 64 l (b)(7)(C) I Yes, the entire site. And, again, we're just trying to find to what extent are the problems that we have to go and fix. And, again, it wasn't anything that hey, at this time something is wrong. It's 1 ike I found these things in the past. And, again, those things will be found. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) And all the past things could you --were you able to go back and attach that to a report or some form of documentation from his previous reportings?

l (b)(l)(C) I: No, because again a lot of them happened when he was with New World and everything. I don't even know if (b)(7)(C) You weren't there. SPECIAL AGENT Okay. I: Yes. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(CJ Okay. Anything else, Mr. M urphy? MR. MURPHY: That's it. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C)

Okay. A couple of '-------I closing questions.

Have I threatened you in any manner in exchange for your testimony? ~b-)(-7)-(C_)~~~~~.....JI

No. SPECIAL AGENT l (b)(7)(C)

H ave I offered you any reward in exchange for your testimony? (202) 2 34-44 33 NEAL R. GROSS COU RT R E POR T ERS AND TRANSC R I B ERS 1 323 R H OD E I SLAND AV E., N.W. WAS H INGTON, D.C. 2 0005-3 7 01 www.nealrgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 ]5 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 65 _l (b_H_n (_C_) ________ __.I= No. SPECIAL AGENT l (b)(l)(C) !: Has it been given freely and voluntarily? l (b)(7)(C) I Yes. (b)(7)(C) Okay. The time is SPECIAL AGENT currently 3:47 p.m. Eastern Standard Time. This interview is concluded. MR. MURPHY: Perhaps you might say --I don't believe that you covered the ability at some point for the witness perhaps to review a transcript of what he said? (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT : Okay. Actual ly, we're going to remain on the record. Mr. Murphy has identified covering the witness' ability to review his

• j (b)(7)(C)

I transcript. -~~~~~~~~' we do make available the opportunity to review the transcript. At the conclusion of our investigative activities there will be an opportunity for you to do that. You'll have an opportunity to come out and proctor, it will probably be multiple individuals, witnesses being able to look over their transcript at one time, or there's also, obviously, after-the-fact, the Freedom of Information Act request. But we have obliged ourselves to make it available, your transcript, upon completion of our activities. (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE .* N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 l (b)(l)(C) I Okay. SPECIAL AGENT !(b)r)(c) !: Okay. Good to go? MR. MURPHY: Yes. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) MR. MURPHY: Yes. Mr. Murphy? SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) : You' re okay? MR. MURPHY: I'm fine. 66 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C)

Okay. All right. The .__ _ ____, time is now 3:49 p.m. The interview is concluded. (202) 234-4433 (INTERVIEW CONCLUDED . ) NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com CERTIFICATE This is to certify that the attached proceedings before the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commissio n in t he matter of: N ame of Proceeding:

Interview o f l (b}(7)(C) Doc k et Number: 1-2012-002 Locatio n: [" were held as herein appears, and that this is the original transcript thereof for the file of the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission taken by me and , thereafter reduced to typewriti n g by me or under the direction of the court reporting company, and that the c.ranscript is a true and accurate record of the foregoing proceedings as recorded on tape(s) provided by the NRC. (202) 234-4433 (b)(7)(C) 1 ranscriber Neal R. r oss & Co., Inc. NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com EXHIBIT 13 Case No. 1-2012-002 Exhibit 13 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION + + + + + OFFICE OF INVESTIGATIONS INTERVIEW

---

---

x IN THE MATTER OF: INTERVIEW OF* SUSAN VIRGINIA ANDREWS (CLOSED) ------------------------------x OI Case No. 1-2012-002 Wednesday, October 26, 2011 Susan Andrew's Residence 1 The above-entitled interview was cor:ducted at 7:28 p.m. Pacific Standard Time. BEFORE: l (b)(7)(C) Special Agent . EXHIBIT I :> PAGE_L OF __ q Q Pt* nFI(F-} (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE IS LAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 2000~701 www.nealrgross

.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 2 P-R-0-C-E-E-D-I-N-G-S 7:28 p.m. (b)(7)(C) SPEC. AGENT Today's date is Wednesday, October 26, 2011; the time is currently 7: 28 p. rn. Pacific Standard Time. For the record, this is an interview of Susan Virginia Andrews, who is currently employed with AWS, a subcontractor to Tetra Tech, at the Hunters Point Naval Shipyard in San Francisco, California. The location of this interview is the residence of Ms. Andrews, (b)(?)(C) at l (b)(7)(C) that's -----------' separate word, (b)(7)(C) r .. _)(-7)-(C_) ____________ ...JI. (b)(?)(C) I am a special agent with the Office of Investigations, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory commission, Region I Field Office in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania. The content of our interview this evening is to discuss allegations and claims made by former RSO, Radiation Safety Officer at Hunters Point, Mr. Bert Bowers, who has made claims of discrimination against Tetra Tech based upon his raising safety concerns, and subsequently being furloughed or terminated from employment. This involves OI case number 1-2012-002. Ms. Andrews, I must first inform you that the NRC strictly prohibits the recording of this interview by any parties other than the NRC or (202) 234-44 33 NEAL R. GROSS COUR T R E PORTERS A N D TRANSCR I BERS 1323 RH O D E ISLAND AV E., N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 3 its designee. Having said that, are you recording or transmitting this interview in any way? MS. ANDREWS: No. SPEC. AGENT l (b)(7)(C) I= Please raise your right hand. Do you swear that the testimony you are about to provide is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? MS. ANDREWS: Yes, I do. SPEC. AGENT l (b)(7)(C) I= Thank you. Please state your full name for the record, and spell your last name. s. MS. ANDREWS: Susan Andrews, A-N-D-R-E-W-SPEC. (b)(7)(C) AGENT .__ __ _. Okay, and you are currently employed as a Senior HP, health physicist with AWS? MS. ANDREWS: Yes. SPEC. AGENT (b)(l)(C) How 1 ong have you been in that position? MS. ANDREWS: I've been at Hunters Point for six years, plus a couple of months. (b)(7)(C) SPEC. AGENT Okay, and where were you before that? MS. ANDREWS: I worked at Neil stone (phonetic) Nuclear, HP, or no, I was a junior HP at (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHING T ON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nea l rgross.com l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 1 4 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 4 the Neilstone Nuclear Power Plant. I was at Gonay (phonetic) before that--boy, you're going back some time. SPEC. AGENT l (b){7)(C) Okay. MS. ANDREWS: So I work refueling. (b)(7)(C) SPEC. AGENT Okay. MS. ANDREWS: And before that, I worked nine months at Oak Ridge for BNFL, and then just power plants. SPEC . AGENT (b)(7)(C) How much time do you have in the nuclear industr y all together? MS. ANDREWS: Nine years plus. SPEC. AGENT (b)(?)(C) And what kind of training have you received and qualifications to get you to the point to be a Senior HP? MS . ANDREWS : I just kind of was a laborer, and started in two nuclear plants, and somebody said I should call Bartlett. SPEC . AGENT (b)(7)(C) Okay. MS. ANDREWS: And so they put me on as a junior deconner, and I took the RAD test that they give, and their tra.ining at Peach Bottom and--a nuclear power plant there; you're probably familiar with that. Okay. And from there, I just--they just kept employing me until they sent me to Oak Ridge on (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 1 6 17 1 8 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 5 a junior job, and then from there on, my next two jobs at Gonay and Neilstone were Junior HP jobs, and then I was hired out here at Hunters Point Shipyard. SPEC. AGENT (b)(7)(C) Okay. And you were hired here as a Senior? MS. ANDREWS: No . SPEC. AGENT (b)(?)(C) You were hired as a Junior? MS. ANDREWS: Yes. SPEC. AGENT (b)(?)(C) Okay, you became a Senior while you were out at--what did you have to do to transition from a Junior to a Senior? Or (inaudible 4:28)? MS. ANDREWS: Well, they have RAD tests they give every year, and I only worked a couple of months as a Junior, and I got--! think it was only one month--and I got into the lab for New World, and I've worked in there for four years. And they were downsizing, and somebody from the lab, they needed to downsize one employee out of the lab, so they asked if anybody wanted to go to the field, and they told me what I'd be doing in the field was basically kind of what I did in the lab, paperwork and stuff, and that's what they still needed done, but they needed somebody to move out of the lab. So I said okay, I'll do it. (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON, O.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Hi 17 1 8 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 6 And--but at the same pay, and the lab pay was identical to Senior pay. (b)(7)(C) SPEC. AGENT ---Okay. MS. ANDREWS: So, but when they moved me out, they titled me a Senior. And I've been out there in the field over two years now. SPEC. AGENT (b)(?)(C) Okay. That's two years. And you arrived here in 2006 at Hunters Point? MS. ANDREWS: 2005. (b)(7)(C) SPEC. AGENT Yes, June 28th. Now, when you came out, it was--you came out as a New World employee, correct? record. MS. ANDREWS: Yes. SPEC. AGENT (b)(?)(C) Okay. MS. ANDREWS: As a Junior. No barking. (b)(7)(C) SPEC. AGENT He wants to be on the MS. ANDREWS: Well we have another puppy next door, and she probably senses her when I don't sense. Junior? l (b)(7)(C) I SPEC. AGENT.: So you came out as a MS. ANDREWS: Yes. (b){7)(C) SPEC. AGENT With New World; New World was taking--was New World--well, from my (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 2~701 www.nealrgross.com l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 \, 25 7 understanding of it, New World was then--MS. ANDREWS: They had the license. SPEC. AGENT (b)(7)(C) --they had the license, and then Tetra Tech got their own license, and New World, the New World employees were either brought on. or they left at that point; is that correct? MS. ANDREWS: Yes, they were all offered a job. (b)(7)(C) SPEC. AGENT When did that license switch happen? Last--MS. ANDREWS: Last year. (b)(7)(C) SPEC. AGENT --last year? MS. ANDREWS: Yes. (b)(7)(C) SPEC. AGENT MS. ANDREWS: Yes. (b)(7)(C) SPEC. AGENT 2010? Okay. Let's go--okay, I got a little bit about your background. What--t ell me what are your responsibilities as a Senior HP? MS. ANDREWS: Mine, I'm down at the site, so I do incomin g and outgoing surveys on al 1 the equipment or, you know, thing that comes in or leaves the site. I can--I man a gate if I need to make sure an RCA or RMA is controlled. I do week l y, monthly, quarterly routine surveys of buildings and walk-(202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAN D AV E., N.W. WASHINGTON, O.C. 20005-3701 www .nealrgross .com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 arounds, make sure nothing comes out of 8 the perimeters. I do a lot of paperwork f o r them, and I do job coverage for outside contractors. When they come in, I ' 11 fol low them around and make sure they go in the RAD, that they've had their RAD orientation, and ass i gned on an RWP and that they are all fitted out and--SPEC. ~: AGENT L___J RWP being a radiological work permit? MS. ANDREWS: Yes. SPEC. AGENT (b)(l)(C) Okay. MS. ANDREWS: Oh, I'm sorry. SPEC. AGENT l (b}(7)(C) !: That's okay. MS. ANDREWS: And get them into a n area and get them out of the area safely. SPEC. AGENT l (b)(7)(C) Okay. M S. ANDREWS: You know, that they don't bring any contamination out with them. SPEC. AGENT !(b)(l)(C) So are all employees, contractors, employees, everybody, when they come on site there at Hunters Point, is everybody given an orientation relative to HP practices and principles and is everybody notified of their responsibilities in terms of how they con duc t themselves in the facility, in and around the facility-- (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBER S 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.neaJrgross.com l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 9 MS. ANDREWS: Yes. l (b)(7)(C) SPEC. AGENT _ --regarding HP practices? MS. ANDREWS: Yes, if they're going near a RAD area, oh yes, they all have to go throu g h RAD orientation. (b)(7)(C) SPEC. AGENT..._~~ Do they have a test, is there an examination associated with it at the end, the conclusion of the orientation? MS. ANDREWS: I don't know. SPEC. AGENT !(b)(7)(C) ! Okay, so you just know they have to take the--how long is that training? MS. ANDREWS: Depends on who's giving it and if they're long-winded or if they've got a busy day, maybe an hour. SPEC . AGENT (b)(?)(C) Okay, an hour . Is that sufficient? In your opinion? MS. ANDREWS: Well a lot of people were re-quals, you know what SPEC . AGENT (b)(l)(C) MS. ANDREWS: Yes. Re-quals? SPEC. AGENT D: They've done it be fore somewhere else? MS. ANDREWS: Yes, well they've been on our site before. Like--(202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COUR T REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE I SLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON, O.C. 20005-3701 wWW.nealrgross.com l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 10 SPEC. AGENT~: Okay. MS. ANDREWS: --like Kleinfelder' s (phonetic) coming in, and a lot of people have been there, but t hey have to be refreshed. (b)(7)(C) Is SPEC. AGENT contractor? Kleinfelder a MS. ANDREWS: Yes. Yes. So they'll all come in and be refreshed on it , so. Uh-huh. (b)(7)(C) SPEC. AGENT Okay. Who do you report to now? MS. ANDREWS: l (b)(7)(C) 1. SPEC. AGENT l (b)(7)(C) Okay, and what i s his position? O f l'.b)(7)(C) I MS. ANDREWS: He's in charge . '-!(b-)(7_)(_c) ___ __,l and he's also the!(b)(?)(C) 1. r::-l (b':"':')(7:::"':)(~C).::::==::;1--;:l (b=)(7):: (=C)===~-And then he fills in for _______ ~when _______ gone, and he' s t he (b)(?)(C)

• SPEC. AGENT l (b)(7)(C) r MS. ANDREWS: Yes. l (b)(7)(C) That's . SPEC. AGENT l (b)(l)(C) Okay. MS. ANDREWS: He also ~l'b-)(-7)-(c_i _____ l (b)(7)(C) I . down there, too. .___ __________

-;::::::=!........ (b)(7)(C) AGENT and--(202) 234-4433 SPEC. Okay. Power grading NEAL R. GROSS COURT R EP ORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AV E., N.W. WASHINGTON , D.C. 2000~?01 www.nealrgross .com l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ll MS. ANDREWS: Yes, he sees that it's done right. Yes, he watches that. (b){7)(C) SPEC. AGENT Okay, did anybody--MS. ANDREWS: He's got a lot of hats. SPEC. AGENT (b)(7)(C) --did anyone, do you have any report--employees that report to you? MS

• ANDREWS : No. (b)(7)(C) SPEC. AGENT ,._~__, Okay. What are the policies and procedures, if there is a piece of legislation so to speak, that you guys at Tetra Tech are guided by? What's the bible for you, so to speak? Is it--is it a Naval, is it Navy documents, i s it t he NRC license, what is kind of the governing document for you? MS. ANDREWS: The NRC license. SPEC . AGENT (b)(l)(C)

MS. ANDREWS: Yes. SPEC. AGENT (b)(l)(C) It's the NRC license? Okay. Do you know what that license specifies in terms of what--have you ever viewed the license or looked at it from a content perspective in terms of your jo b , and where it. fits in the license? about? (20 2) 234-4433 MS. ANDREWS: The CFR-20 you're talking SPEC. AGENT (b)(7)(C) Well, the license NEAL R. GROSS COUR T REP O RTER S AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLA ND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON , D.C. 20005-3701 www.n eairgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 12 itself is aligned with--I'll say that the license and the CFRs are aligned, so do you know what, from a radiation perspective, what does the license say about how you are to respond to things from an RP perspective, and an HP perspective? Does the license say that you are insure that all persons and equipment are scanned or surveyed? Is there anything in particular in that license from a documenta t ion perspective that ties you to--what ties you t o i t? MS. ANDREWS: Yes. SPEC. AGENT (b)(l)(C) : Okay. And what does it--what is your requirement by the license? Is it to insure that everything's safe, is it to--kind of give me a rundown of what--from your knowledge--MS. ANDREWS: Yes, we're to keep the RAD contained in a safe environment so that it doesn't spread out to the community. Is that what you're--SPEC . AGENT l (b)(7)(C) Right. Well yes, I just wanted to get--and does the license tell you guys how you' re supposed to do that, or is there some other policy that--company policy that says you're supposed to do it by keeping things under lock and key, by having surveys done once a day , or whatever the rules are? (202) 234-4433 MS . ANDREWS : No, that--it sets the NEAL R. GROSS COURT RE P OR TE RS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHO D E ISLAND AV E., N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nea l rgross.com l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 1 4 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 13 guidelines for everything, and then procedures come out of those guidelines pertaining to the site. SPEC. AGENT (b)(J)(C) Okay. And those procedures are Tetra Tech company procedures? MS. ANDREWS: Yes. SPEC. AGENT (b)(l)(C) : Okay. That's what I wanted to know. getting at. MS. ANDREWS: Okay. Okay. SPEC. AGENT~: That's what I was I didn't mean to ask you in a too convoluted manner. MS

• ANDREWS : No I I Just didn, t know. No' y o u're fine; I just--sometimes I don't know where people are coming at. SPEC. AGENT l (b)(7)(C) !: What was the safety culture at Tetra Tech? What's the safety--well what is the--(inaudible 13:14) what's the safety culture like? Is it heavily promoted, is it encouraged, is it one of those things that it's put on paper, but nobody really means what they say? that--{202) 234-4433 MS. ANDREWS: Yes, you got it. SPEC . AGENT (b)(J)(C) So, it' s something MS. ANDREWS: Yes, we have a lot SPEC. AGENT (b)(J)(C) --it's formally NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON , D.C. 20~3701 www .nealrgross

.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 required-- MS. ANDREWS: Yes. (b)(7)(C) SPEC. AGENT 14 --but it's not really MS. ANDREWS: But as soon as you're over with the 7:00 meeting in the morning, where they do the safety briefing, then it's push, push, push. You knowr don 1 t speed, don't speed, but hurry, hurry, hurry. SPEC. AGENT l (b)(7)(C) l When you say--MS. ANDREWS: You better be--SPEC . AGENT (b)(l)(C) --when you say speed--MS. ANDREWS: We have a speed limit. We have a speed limit on site, just a little tiny thing , you know. SPEC . AGENT (b)(l)(C) Speed limit in terms of your work or driving a car? MS . ANDREWS : Driving a car. Just a speed limit, like you' re used to. And then it I s all at once hurry up up here. Hurry down here. Hurry, you know, and it's like--SPEC. AGENT ~: push for everything? Why is there such a MS . ANDREWS : There shouldn't be, but there is. They want to get the job pushed faster and (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPOR TE RS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE IS LAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgros s.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 1 4 15 16 17 .18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 15 faster, and sometimes people in such a hurry to please, we're trying to please them so much, that we hurry. They have accidents and-SPEC. AGENT l (b)(l)(C) L Okay--MS. ANDREWS: Okay, the other day. You' re never supposed to drive a JLG without somebody in front of you guiding you. SPEC. AGENT (b)(l)(C) What's a JLG? MS. ANDREWS: A man lift. SPEC . AGENT (b)(l)(C) : Okay. MS. ANDREWS: Okay, and--SPEC. AGENT l (b)(7)(C) !: Wi t hout a spo t;ter? MS. ANDREWS: Right. SPEC. AGENT (b)(l)(C) Right. MS. ANDREWS: And they wanted it hurr i edly to get t o the other end of the site. So nobody was available; everybody else had something else to doSPEC. AGENT El= Somebody was driving it with no spotter. MS. ANDREWS: So they just--yes. So they just drove across site without a spotter, and we're like okay. SPEC. (b)(7)(C) AGENT problematic. Okay. Yes, that's bad. That's--that's So there's a push to get things done fast; is that by the (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHOD E ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www .nealrgros s.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 12 1 3 1 4 1 5 16 1 7 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 16 construction--is that construction folks, is that the HP leadership --it. MS. ANDREWS: That's not the HPs. SPEC. AGENT (b)(l)(C) It's not the HPs? MS. ANDREWS: We're all complaining about (b)(7)(C) SPEC. AGENT .__ __ ... Okay, so it' s the construction people which, from a practical standpoint, many of which haven' t worked in the nuclear industry, they' re construction people; they' re not--MS. ANDREWS: Right, yes. (b)(7)(C) SPEC. AGENT --they're not nuc l ear f o lks or industry personnel, so they just see getting a ditch dug as quick as possible, and moving on, or whatever the construction project is? Okay. MS. ANDREWS: Now you' 11 have the younger , the younger HPs are in there, that this is the on l y place maybe they've ever worked. SPEC. AGENT l (b)(7)(C) !: So they don't know any better? MS. ANDREWS: Right, this is the only culture they know, so they' re in a hurry mode of hurry and scan, hurry get out, you know, hurry , hurry, you know, it's lunchtime, let's go. (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE .* N.W. WASHINGTON. O.C. 20005-3701 www .nealrgross .com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 15 1.6 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 was was off l (b)(7)(C) sitting waiting (b)(7)(C) SPEC. AGENT .__ __ ...., MS. ANDREWS: Just and watching them on something, and Okay. like the work down I had to the side of the road, and here ! out of his area, and the tech 17 other day, I a thing, and stop and pull comes !!b)(7)(C) is--the tech never even frisked him out, because you just don't do (b)(7)(C) that to .__ __ ___. because he's just corning along, and you don't need to frisk him. Okay, so the radiation he didn't (inaudible 16:13), and that just was a previously contaminated area. But now the kid frisked everybody else out, the other--the laborers that come along later, and I sat there for a good while. You know, they all stopped, but (b)(7)(C) was talk ing, and he just kept on walking out. And the guy intimid ates people that you're not going to say hey, you know, come back here until I frisk you. You just not--you're just beat up by him, that's all. SPEC . AGENT (b)(?)(C) And he was corning out of a contaminated area? MS. ANDREWS: An RCA/RMA that--they had just knocked a hood down; he was working too fast or something, you probably can figure it out. I was in the office, I just heard the radio transmissions, and a hood that comes out of that glass building I pointed (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.ne alrgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1 7 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 18 at down there, and a lot of stuff come out, and it was--they got it all supposedly cleaned up. But that had just happened, and right along there, they' re digging up that asphalt, and underneath that asphalt, according to the history of the site, it's pretty well polluted with whatever they put out there, so it's got to be taken up easy. So al 1 they were doing was digging up the asphalt, and for some reason, they tore down, knocked down this hood. And so that who le area, it flies, you know, i t doesn't j ust like l and r i gh t where it's supposed to. So you know, you've got to be careful coming out of the re. (b)(7)(C) And he--and at that SPEC. AGENT....._ _ __. . l (b)(7)(C) I point, not frisked; he didn't scan, he--nothing? MS. ANDREWS: No. No. It was-SPEC. AGENT (b)(?)(C) No, he d i dn't--no hand and foot device? MS. ANDREWS: No. No. SPEC . AGENT (b)(?)(C) Nothing? MS. ANDREWS: Huh-uh. (b)(7)(C) SPEC. AGENT ....._ _ __,, So he could have been hot for all intents and purposes when he left--MS . ANDREWS : Yes . He could have tracked it right out o nto the--I mean, that's the idea of {202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE .. N.W , WASHINGTON. D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross .com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 19 having RAD control there. RAD tech? SPEC . AGENT l (b)(l)(C) l (b)(7)(C) MS . ANDREWS : . Right. Who was the And I think he's a~r_~&_c_> _ ___.I or he came in as a (inaudible 10:14>, well I don't know what people get paid, you know, but they tell us when they're promoted; it's none of your business, you know. But he came in as a {inaudible 18: 22). (b)(7)(C) SPEC. AGENT ...._ _ __, MS. ANDREWS: I t's, (Inaudible 18:23)? they get on the back of a, like a lawnmover thing, you know, riding lawnmo wer, and they have the detectors all down and they co me across the ground, and the y drive a little pack on a pad, and the 2350, you know, scan that whole area. So thatis why he came in, to run one of those, X) but now he's working a gate, and he migh t be a I don't know what he is. He might be a b X x C> or all I know. I don't know what they--how or when (b){7)(C) SPEC. AGENT And you said you heard all this over radio traffic? that. (202) 234-4433 MS. ANDREWS: No, I sat there and watched (b)(7)(C) Oh, you watched it? SPEC. AGENT (b)(7)(C) MS. ANDREWS: I watched NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 walk out. www .nealrgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 1 4 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 20 I couldn't believe it. SPEC. AGENT l (b)(7)(C) I: And what day was this? MS. ANDREWS: Well , let me look. Last week. SPEC. AGENT (b)(l)(C) As best you can remember. MS. ANDREWS: Las t week; it wasn't this week, it was this last week. I mean as long as l sat there for waiting on--SPEC . AGENT (b)(?)(C) Day, was this during day shift? MS. ANDREWS: Yes. Oh yes. SPEC. AGENT E]: Okay. Okay. I'll move on. I just needed to get all those details, because I have to take this information back with me. Okay. Did Tetra Tech provide training to employees on how to report safety concerns, safety r elated issues? Was there a training wherein they had someone say hey, if you want to report a safety issue, you're not comfortable with something, you can write a condition report; you can annotate it in the database; you can call this person; you can leave an anonymous note in a box; whatever the mechanisms were, were you all trained on how to report safety issues? (202) 234-4433 MS. ANDREWS: I don't know if you call it NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON, O.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 21 trained; I know in the morning meeting, they bring it up that if we have any issues, there's an 800 number you can call. there? (b)(7)(C) SPEC. AGENT So there's a platform? MS. ANDREWS: Yes. SPEC. AGENT (b)(?)(C) And they put it out MS. ANDREWS: Yes, and then the other day a while back, l (b)(7)(C) I comes out to a meeting; somebody made that 800 phone call, and he came out and said "I'd appreciate it if you come. talk to me first, and here's my cards. 11 And he handed out his card, told everybody to call him instead of calling the BOO number. Well, I tell you what, I got a feeling it was the laborers, because I kind of heard some scutt l ebutt. but these people have been trying to talk. They won't listen, so you've got to take it up a notch. (b)(7)(C) SPEC. AGENT : Okay. MS. ANDREWS: Would you like a thing of water? SPEC. AGENT!(b)(?)(C) L No, I'm fine. Thank you. Okay. Are you , aware of Bert Bowers, former RSC, raising safety concerns to management? (202) 234-443 3 MS. ANDREWS: Yes, whenever there was a NEAL R. GROSS C O UR T R EP OR TERS AN D TRANSCRIB E RS 1 323 R H OD E ISLAN D AV E., N.W. WA SHI NG T ON. O.C. 2000 5-3701 www.nealrgross.com . ' 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 22 concern he, you know, because I'd go to related? SPEC. AGENT (b)(7)(C) MS. ANDREWS: Safety? SPEC. AGENT l (b)(l)(C) I= Were they safety-Right. Were they nuclear safety issues or were they general complaints about just thing s that may not have had a safety significance? issues? MS. ANDREWS: No, Bert-l (b)(l)(C) I*. SPEC. AGENT They were safety MS. ANDREWS: Bert--yes. SPEC. AGENT l (b)(l)(C) !: Okay And did you witness him go to management? Did you ever witness to l (b)(l)(C) I him go _______ _, or anyone in the leadership regarding his safety issues? MS. ANDREWS: I never saw him go to h i m, but I know that if I had a concern about something, Bert would figure it out and come back, and it was pretty well resolved. (b)(7)(C) SPEC. AGENT .__ __ _, Did you ever see any condition reports written by Bert on certain safety related issues, or issues that you felt were safetyrelated issues? Did you have access or opportunity to view any CRs? Do you guys write condition reports (202) 2344433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 3 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 23 here? Discrepancy reports? Maybe you call MS. ANDREWS: No, I don't--no I wouldn't see something written against somebody like that. SPEC

• AGENT (b)(l)(C) Right. Well, if it's a general, not necessarily pointing any one person out or throwing anyone under the bus, but a safety concern that, you know, was very--MS. ANDREWS: Like lessons learned? SPEC. AGENT l (b)(l)(C) I= Okay, is that what you guys call it here? Lessons learned? MS. ANDREWS: I would call it that. SPEC. AGENT (b)(7)(C) Is that a database that everybody has access to? MS. ANDREWS: No, but when we would have our yearly training with Bert, Bert would bring up issues of past t hings--SPEC. AGENT (b)(l)(C) That came up. MS. ANDREWS: --yes, and he'd go like we don' t do it that way, everybody understands, you know. And he had the platform to speak, Bert did. SPEC. AGENT l (b)r)(C) I: Did he ever tell you directly that he reported sa f ety concerns to management?

Did he come to you and say hey, you know, I reported this or this, and it's being received in whatever type of way? (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE .* N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 24 MS. ANDREWS: If I had a concern, I took it to him, and he had to go to somebody higher up, he would tell me he did, yes. ,..,..,.,.,,...,, ,,........., (b)(7)(C) SPEC. AGENT And did he ever tell you that he took his own concerns to management on whatever the issue was? MS. ANDREWS: We were having a real rough time with posting out there , and the guys not posting after they were locking their gates up, and him and I were just running all over trying to post this place back up before we left at night for a period of time. And I was kind of getting a little weary of it, and he was definitely weary of it, and so he--yes, he brought it up to management; he came out to the 7:00 meeting and tried to talk, please post your areas, you know, we can't have this; if somebody walks on site, you know, we're in violation, and(b)(7)(C) SPEC. AGENT Is that how--there were issues that it was going on pretty regular l y, and t hey were leaving doors unlocked, generators out--MS. ANDREWS: Yes. (b)(7)(C) SPEC. AGENT --withou t putting equipment up--(202) 2.34-4433 MS. ANDREWS: Yes. SPEC. AGENT (b)(l)(C) : Okay. NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON, O.C. 20005-3701 www.nea i rgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ll 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 25 MS. ANDREWS: Yes. SPEC. AGENT L____J: Okay. MS. ANDREWS: Oh yes. And I even went to the techs, tryin g to be polite and say hey, on my way out, you know, I stopped, fixed your gate, locked your gate, whatever--you know, re-posted your gate; please do this, you know, don't--and this--I hate t~ keep bringing the poor kid's name up, b ut it was basically l (b)(7)(C) I l (b)(7)(C) I .... ---------..J. area . -* ________ __, area is --you have to watch that--him. SPEC. AGENT l (b)(7)(C) I: Okay. MS. ANDREWS: I just had to fix a p osting a couple of weeks ago. I was like dumbfounded; I said how did this all get messed up? And--SPEC. AGENT l (b)(7)(C) D k h . o you now w o in particular that Bert took his issues to? Did he go to the same person al l the time? Who did he address his concerns with? MS. ANDREWS: Well, he would have taken it up to_r_)(-?)-(c_, _____ ...... I once (b)(?)(C) was there. When Bert was with New World, he would have taken it up the line through New World. (b)(7)(C) SPEC. AGENT 1...l (b-)(7)-(C_) __ ---1~ So he never took it to (202) 234-4433 MS. ANDREWS: See, he was just kind of--NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE .. N.W. WA S HINGTON , D.C. 20005-3701 www .ne a l rgross.com 1 2 3 4 s 6 7 8 9 10 ll 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 SPEC. AGENT (b)(7)(C) He never took it--MS. ANDREWS: Yes, he'd go over and talk to L_J. SPEC. AGENT Okay. MS . ANDREWS : You know, I thought they got along pretty good. SPEC. AGENT (b)(?)(C) Okay. Did anyone from management ever discuss with you the fact that Bert raised safety issues? MS. ANDREWS: No. SPEC. AGENT l (b)(7)(C) Okay. Do you be lieve that Bert was retaliated against for raising safety issues? MS. ANDREWS: Yes. SPEC. AGENT (b)(?)(C) : Okay, now why do you think that? MS. ANDREWS: Well, we couldn't keep that end of the area posted correctly , and all at once, this was when chey were going--and they would all at once, we'd be like why did you take those postings down? The laborers would go they were told to take the postings down. And when we told--wh y did we survey it out? When was this released? You know, so right there in that period of time was a real bad time that things were getting moved around--(inaudible (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLA ND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

1. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11. 12 13 1 4 15 16 17 18 19 2 0 2 1 22 23 24 25 27 26:41) site, we're supposed to de-post that and keep , l (b)(7)(C) track of the RCA/RMAs.

That's my Job and ._ ______ ...J job to keep track of all this. They were moving fences, doing everything; we' re going like what's going on here? And we go to Bert and say what's going on, or ... l (b-)(-7)(_c_) ________ ~I and what's going on, and okay, just make the maps like they've moved it. It's okay, it's okay Well, did somebody survey it out? I don't know those answers; I was just told to do my job. And so--but it was pretty bad out in that Parcel E area. SPEC . AGENT (b)(?)(C) So this is al l going on in Parcel E, is the--MS. ANDREWS: Yes. SPEC. AGENT!(b)(7)(C) !: --the primary area of c oncern? MS. ANDREWS : Yes, and now it' s C, because l (b)(?)(C) I tha t's where'-*--------~ working now. SPEC. (b)(7)(C) AGENT .___ _ ___. It was Parce l E , and now it's C. Okay. MS. ANDREWS: See, you have kind of two RAD supervisors out there in charge of the working stuff like that. ... r_w_)(_C_) _ ____.I* (202) 234-4433 SPEC. AGENT (b)(7)(C) And who's that? MS . ANDREWS : ~l (b-)(-7)-(c_i ________ ~I and ... l'D_)r_i(_C_) __ NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON, O.C. 20005-3701 www.neaJrgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 1 1 2 13 1 4 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 (b)(7)(C) SPEC. AGENT MS . ANDREWS : 28 Those are the two RAD? Yes, yes. (b)(7)(C) And l (b)(7)(C) I ~*----_J group is totally different-- ---(b)(7)(C) I 8 1. t (b)(7)(C) (b)(7)(C) SPEC. AGENT or MS. ANDREWS: .. 1 (-b)(-l)-(C_l __________ ....,jl I think. SPEC. AGENT (b)(l)(C) ... r_)(-7)-(C-) _______ ___.h MS. ANDREWS: Uh-huh. And his group move right along, and he doesn't push them, he just works them; he doesn't intimidate them, he talks to them politely, and when you come up around their area, you know daggone well it's all going to be posted right; you're not going to have any issues; you're not go i ng to see people not --you' re not going t.o see anybody come out of an area that hasn't been fri s)ced and looked over and everything else upside down. You just aren't. going to see that when you see his group l (b)(l)(C) I working. But ~*----~~roup is--he's forward, he's loud, he's push, push, push, do, d o , do; and these p e ople are j ust (b)(7)(C) How many people work SPEC. AGENT for him? MS. ANDREWS: RAD wise, he usually only has maybe three RAD techs under him, but he watches over the laborers, too. So he stands there and kind (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORT E RS AN O TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHOD E I SLAND AV E., N.W. WAS H INGT O N. D.C. 20005-3701 www.neal r gross.com l 2 3 4 s 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 29 And l (b)(7)(C) I of directs the whole show. ._ _______ _, does too, but he directs it, and everybody works calmly, safely; I mean extremely org ani zed. It's just night and day. (b)(7)(C) SPEC. AGENT Okay. Do you know if Bert took his concerns to any other entities outside of Tetra Tech before everything went down, or before things got bad, do you know if he went to the Navy or if he went to anyone else to report--MS. ANDREWS : Before he got asked to leave? SPEC. AGENT 1._J: Yes, before--MS. ANDREWS: No, I would say that Bert (b)(7)(G) only talked to his upline--SPEC . AGENT (b)(l)(C) Okay. MS. ANDREWS: If he had a problem. I was floored, they told me he was sick. I thought he was sick for a couple of days. ... (b--)(7-)(-G)-. SPEC. AGENT Do you know what management said was the reason for ge ttin g rid cf him? MS. ANDR EWS: They never said. I was told (b)(7)(C) by that he thought he was sick. .__ __ _, (b)(7)(C) SPEC. AGENT Okay. MS. ANDREWS: He said "So you just answer to me now, and send your reports to me; just send them to me. 11 And I thought okay, wow, what' s wrong with (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTE RS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON , D.C. 20005-370 1 www.nealrgross.com l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 l9 20 21 22 23 24 25 30 Bert? SPEC. AGENT~ Now, when you worked for Bert, did you know him to be very safety-conscious? MS. ANDR EW S: Oh yes. (b)(7)(C) SPEC. AGENT And detail-oriented relative to the rules and the procedures? MS. ANDREWS: Oh yes. (b)(7)(C) SPEC. A GENT Did he take it pretty seriously that his name on the license, the NRC license--MS. ANDREWS: Oh yes. (b)(7)(C) SPEC. AGENT --as the RSO? Was that a big thing to him? MS. ANDREWS: That was--yes. That's very important. SPEC. AGENT (b)(l)(C) : Did you ever overhear any conversation by anyone in management at Tetra Tech telling Bert that they would just take his name off the license, and--MS. ANDREWS: No, I never overheard that. (b)(7)(C) SPEC. AGENT ,___ __ _,, Okay. Were you ever interviewed by anyone at Tetra Tech regarding Bert's issues that he may have raised, and then his subsequent termination? Did they ever do an internal (202} 234-4433 NEAL A. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCR I BE RS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON, O.C. 20005-3701 www.ne alrgross.c om 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 1 6 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 31 investigation and ask employees-- MS. ANDREWS: No. They don't talk to me about Bert. The only thing that was ever saio to me about Bert, ~l (b-)(-7)-(C_l ______ ~l came up to me a couple of days after, you know, we obviously knew he wasn't there, because they were shredding his stuff, and I . l (b)(7)(C) I was--tears in my eyes--but~-----~looked at me, I was at the printer or copier and he says You okay? 11 And I said "Yes, I'll be okay." And he says "Do you think you can work for r .__)(_7)_(C_) ___ _.I? II And I went like I'll give it my best shot. And that's as much as I knew of anything like that. That's all the more words that l (b)(7)(C) I had. (b)(?)(C) SPEC. AGENT ___ _, You said they were shredding his things out of his 0ffice? MS. ANDREWS: Yes. SPEC. AGENT (b)(?)(C) Out of Bert's office? l (b)(7)(C) I MS. ANDREWS: Yes. ~. _______ _.F as just sitting there shredding stuff. I walked in, I went like whoa. okey doke. She's just shredding, I went like well, They broke into his cabinets and everything. He had depleted sources in there that he that he used for like training purposes and stuff that was given to him. I did a survey on them all the time, but--(202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPOR TERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLA ND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross .com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1.1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 sources--training? SPEC. (b)(7)(C) AGENT 32 On the depleted MS. ANDREWS: Yes, (b)(7)(C) SPEC. AGENT --that he used for MS. ANDREWS: Yes, just--SPEC. AGENT l (b)(7)(C) I= Was that the button and--was one a button, and--MS . ANDREWS : And there was some like orange Fiestaware. SPEC. AGENT!(b)(l)(C) !: Fiestaware? MS. ANDREWS: Yes, just, it was all in a little suitcase, like attache case type thing, in his cupboard there . And you know, I ' d a 1 ways make sure it was right there, and it SPEC. AGENT (b)(l)(C) So those things had been surveyed and were clean; they were okay? MS

• ANDREWS : Yes. And they had that cupboard open; they broke the l oc ks, they didn't even ask him for his keys so they could just open something up. They--and he still was on the license. He--SPEC. AGENT (b)(l)(C)
• Right. MS. ANDREWS: --he was still like supposed to be there, and they're breaking into his stuff, and then shredding files. What files they were shredding, (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WAS H INGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.c om 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 33 I don't know, but they were just shredding. For days they were shredding. (b)(7)(C) SPEC. AGENT Are you aware of any other employees who were potentially retaliated against for raising safety-related issues? MS. ANDREWS: Yes. (b)(7)(C) SPEC. AGENT.._~___. MS . ANDREWS : l (b)(7)(C) Who else? Holy tamole, you don't think every ain't scared about saying something now, they just let him--told him go. I mean--SPEC. AGENT Do you know wha t: happened in particular?

Do you have any more --a direct knowledge of what happened with l (b)(7)(C) I? MS . ANDREWS: (b)(l)(C) and I were pretty (b)(7)(C) )(C) He didn't have much respect for .._ _____ ....1 and you know, at that particular time, you know, Bert's in charge, and he has supervisors that are to be doing what he tells them to do. And L___J was going out having laborers, untrained people, go out and do our sampling in the field, and no Senior around, no supervision around, they'd just--she'd give them .a list and say go collect this many samples, whatever, (b)(7) and (C) couldn' t stand it any longer. You know, there she goes again, sending the laborers out, and there's (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON , D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross .com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 34 no Senior overseeing them; they're not even Juniors, they're not nothing; they're laborers. SPEC. AGENT (b)(?}(C) Right MS. ANDREWS: --so he was trying to tell supervisors there she goes again, and he called her kind of a name, and then he was frustrated, because there's nothing you can do about this lady. SPEC. AGENT E:]: So he did call h.er the name? MS. ANDREWS: Well, I didn't hear i t, but they say he did. SPEC. AGENT Okay. I know what that is, you don't have to repeat it. MS. ANDREWS : Well, sometimes in the dictionary, she might fall under that name. SPEC. AGENT (b)(l)(C) Yes, that's certainly outside of what I know--MS. ANDREWS: Yes, but she 1 s getting paid a Senior wage 1 (inaudible 3 5 : 1 7) a Senior job, and al 1 she did was go out and tell laborers to go out and sample--SPEC. AGENT L__J= Right, she wasn't doing them herself? MS. ANDREWS: She wasn't even overseeing them. She left. She'd meet them at the gate and tell (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISlAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1 7 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 35 them to go do their job, and off. SPEC. AGENT l (b)(7)(C) !: But laborers shouldn't be doing samples anyway. MS. ANDREWS: No. No, that's not in our procedure at all. (b)(7 J(C) SPEC. AGENT So there's another procedural issue and nuance with laborers do i ng surveys. MS. ANDREWS: to l (b)(7)(C) I Thanks SPEC. (b)(7)(C) AGENT Policy calls--your procedures ca l l for you to have RP-trained personnel conducting all surveys; correct? MS. ANDREWS: Yes, that's correct. (b)(7)(C) SPEC. AGENT Okay. Did you ever raise any safety issues? MS. ANDREWS: Yes. To Bert; I always went to Bert. (b)(7)(C) SPEC. AGENT You always went to Bert, and he'd pass them up the--he came back with an a n swer for you one way or the other? MS. ANDREWS: Yes, yes, he al ways resolved my little issues. (b)(7)(C) SPEC. AGENT..._~__, Okay. MS. ANDREWS: Except the L___J one. can't seem to get aro und that girl. NEAL R. GROSS We (202) 234-4433 COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.oealrgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 14 1 5 16 17 1 8 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 SPEC. AGENT L ____ J Right. 36 And how long had you worked for Bert? MS. ANDREWS: Ever since I got out here. Six, seven years. SPEC. AGENT (b)(J)(C) Six years ago? MS. ANDREWS: Yes, he was New World RSO; he had so many hats on then. He was project manager and back and forth and, SPEC. AGENT (b)(J)(C) And he had a pret t y good reputation? credible? MS. ANDREWS: Oh yes. SPEC. AGENT (b)(l)(C) He was pretty MS. ANDREWS: Yes. SPEC. AGENT (b)(l)(C) Okay. MS . ANDREWS : I mean i f you--y o u m:j..ght talk to some people that w il l dispute tha t , but if you dig deep enough into them, you'll kind of figure out that they were doing poor RAD practices. SPEC. AGENT l (b)(7)(C) I: Right. MS. ANDREWS: You know what I mean? And they wanted to do it their way, and it wasn't the procedural way. (b)(7)(C) SPEC. AGENT ...._ _ __. What's the benefit of--why were, or why have all these corners been cut? (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND T RANSCRIBERS 1323 RHOD E ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON, O.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross .oom 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ll. 12 13 14 15 16 ]. 7 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 37 What's the significance? What's the benefit to Tetra Tech for cutting it, to cut those corners? MS. ANDREWS: Well I think they're on a fixed contract now, you know, money's fixed. So it's the push to get it done, and(b)(7)(C) SPEC. AGENT So you can move on to the next thing? MS. ANDREWS: Yes. (b)(7)(C) SPEC. AGENT You're not billing hourly anymore, you're flat rate essentially? MS. ANDREWS: Right. Yes. (b)(7)(C) SPEC. AGENT Okay. If you could bill it hourly, you could take your time; now it's a thing where they want to get in, get it done, so they can go to what's next? MS. ANDREWS: Right. Yes. That's the only way they're going to make money. (b)(7)(C) SPEC. AGENT Okay. Okay. I have a couple of closing questions for you. Have I threatened you in any manner in exchange for your testimony? MS. ANDREWS: Oh no. SPEC. AGENT (b)(l)(C) Have I offered you any reward in exchange for your testimony? (2 0 2) 234-4433 MS . ANDREWS : No. NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 12 13 14 15 l6 J. 7 10 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 38 SPEC. AGENT (b)(7)(C) Has i t been given freely and voluntarily? MS. ANDREWS: Yes, it has. SPEC. AGENT l (b)(7)(C) Is there anything else you'd lik~ to add to the record at this time? MS. ANDREWS: Should I? SPEC. AGENT l (b)(7)(C) ' Well, that's certainly up to you, if there was anything that we have not ta l ked about or have not captured. MS. ANDREWS: Well on this little rec o rde r , we d i dn't record how~!'b_H_7 l_(c_J __ ~l intimidated me when I first got there. Should that be on there? SPEC . AGENT (b)(?)(C) You certainly--yes. You talked about--MS. ANDREWS: When I f i rst got here, I was only here a couple, maybe a week, and I was in l (b)(7)(C) I ~----------' group at metal debris brief, in BR, and he pulled me aside with a witness, and said--SPEC. AGENT~: Who was the witness? MS . ANDREWS : You know, man, I can't remember that gentleman's name, but he got tired of i t , and he and went LJ to f" r)(J)(C) (202} 234-4433 l , whatever. SPEC. AGENT (b)(?)(C) r*'"' MS. ANDREWS: Point, yes. NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE .* N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 I what was his www.nealrgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 l (b)(7)(C) I name? ~----__, would know; I don't remember. (b)(7)(C) SPEC. AGENT Okay, that's fine. 39 MS. ANDREWS! Didn't know him that well for that long, because I went into the lab. SPEC. AGENT l (b)(l)(C) L Right. MS. ANDREWS: And then he left, because he couldn't put up with it any longer , !(b)(l)(C) on him. But anyhow, (b)(7)(C) pulled me ove r to the side, told me ...._ __ _. if I had a problem with *cuss words, which he shared a few of them with me, that he--h ow he spoke, and how he was, i f I had a problem with that, then I needed to leave his group, you know. And--but he told me then that I was just put in h i s group, nobody else wanted me, and so I w ould lose my job. If I couldn't work for him, I couldn't work at Bunters Point Shipyard. So I said okay. And then I tried to fi gure out how to get away from him. And I started doing the porta-monitor, they started a porta-monitor up there, and so l (b)(7)(C) I (b)(7)(C) . (phonetic) let me do that, and then ~==::;--------1 (b)(?)(C) decided he'd like to have my sk i lls into tr.e lab. ...._ _ ___, So I bumped right into the lab, and I stayed there protected by them. (b)(7)(C) SPEC. AGENT So you--that' s how you've been able to get away from him? MS. ANDREWS: Yes, that's how I got away (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COUR'T REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1 323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrg~ .com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 l l 12 13 1 4 1 5 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 40 l (b)(7)(C) I from~--------~

• (b)(7)(C) SPEC. AGENT ....._ _ __, And you're--just for clarification, are you reporting to him now? MS . ANDREWS : No. (b)(7)(C) SPEC. AGENT..._ _ __, No? Okay. Got you. MS
• ANDREWS : The only time I come l.. f (b)(7)(C) remotely close to having to report to him is l (b)(l)(C) I and_,..._ _____ _, are both off the same day. ..._ __ _., you know. SPEC . AGENT (b)(l)(C) Okay. MS. ANDREWS: And then we walk rice paper, (b)(7)(C) SPEC. AGENT Okay. MS. ANDREWS: I really try to get along with him; he just, you know. So I just--he lays low; I lay low. (202) 234-4433 (b)(7)(C) SPEC. AGENT [End of tape] Okay. NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com CERTIFICATE This is to certify that the attached proceedings before the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission in the matter of: Name of Proceeding:

Interview of Susan Andrews Docket Number: 1-2012-002 Location: San Francisco, California were held as herein appears, and that this is the original transcript thereof for the file of the Uni t ed States Nuclear Regulatory Commission taken by me and, thereafter reduced to typewriting by me or under the direction of the court reporting company, and that the transcript is a true and accurate record of the foregoing proceedings as recorded on tape(s) prov i ded by the NRC. (202) 234-4433 Official Transcriber Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORT E RS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.neaJrgross.com EXHIBIT 14 Case No. 1-2012-002 Exhibit 14 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION + + + + + OFFICE OF INVESTIGATIONS INTERVIEW

---

---

x IN THE MATTER OF: INTERVIEW OF or Case No. l (b)(7)(C) 1-2012-002 (CLOSED) ------------------------------x Thursday, February 9, 2012 State of California Office Bullding 455 Golden Gate Avenue San Francisco, California 94102 1 The above-entitled interview was conducted at 11:12 a.m. BEFORE: l (b)(7)(C)

Special Agent _________ ...., ECHIBrr l 'l,\ ~1-~2 12;1t oo2~ PAGE__L OF ~PAG .(S) NEAL R. GROSS (202) 234-4433 COURT RE PORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealfgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 2 APPEARANCES: On behalf of the Interviewee , Tetra Tech , and other individuals involved in the investi g ation: of: (202) 234-4433 TIMOTHY J. MURPHY, ESQ. Managing Partner Fisher & Phillips, LLP One Embarcadero Center Suite 2340 San Francisco, CA 941 1 1-3712 (4 1 5) 490-9011 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON , D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 a 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 3 P R O C E E D I N G S 11:12 a.m. SPECIAL AGENT L___j Today's date is Thursday, February 9, 2012. Time is currently 11:12 a.m. Pacific Standard Time. For the record, this is an interview of l (b)(7)(C) who is employed with Tetra Tech EC, lnc. at the Hun ters Po int Naval Shipyard in San Francisco, California. The location of this interview is the State of California Office Building, the 10th Floor, Department of Labor at 455 Golden Gate Avenue, San Francisco, Ca1ifornia 9 410 2. 1 am l ... (b-)(7-)(-C) ________ ___,I . t a special agent with the NRC Office of Investig ations, Region I Field Office in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania. Also present is Mr. Tim Murphy, Esquire, for l (b)(7)(C) I who is legal counsel today this morning. We are here to discuss issues pertaining to NRC or Case No. 1-2012-002. And that is in regard to former radiation safety officer representative Elbert, he goes by the name Bert, Bowers who was previously employed at Hunters Point with Tetra Tech and was subsequently transferred and/or subject to (202) 234-4433 NEAL. R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON , D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com ,1. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 lO 11 1.2 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 24 25 4 some form of adverse action and has made claims of discrimination based upon his raising safety-related concerns, That will be the balance of our discussion here this morning. I want to first advise you that the NRC strictly prohibits the recording or transm itting of this interview by any parties other than the NRC or it s designee. Having said that, are you recording or transmitting this in any way? !(b)(l)(C) !: No, sir. (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT Are you I Mr. Murphy? MR. MORPHY: I am not. SPECIAL AGENT Secondarily I t he NRC wants to make it known that under 18 U.S. C. 1001 which is essential ly kn own as the false statement provision that it is relevant and germane to our level of dialogue here today. That is to say if you knowingly I and wi llfu lly make any false, fict itious , or fraudulent statements or representations and provide false information you could be subject to prosecuti on under Title 18 United States Code Section 1001 which is a felony punishable by a sentence of up to five years in confinement and a $250,000 fine. That is not a threat. That is just to say that I'm a federal agent and if you tell me something and I find out it's (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE I SLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 2000!>-3701 www.nea l rgross.com l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 5 not true, we're going to have a problem. l (b)(7)(C) I ...... ____ __.: Understood. We won't have any problems. (b)(7)(C) Please raise your SPECIAL AGENT.__ __ __. right hand. Do you swear that the testimony you're about to provide is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth so help you God? ~l (b_)(7_)(_c) ______ ~!: Yes, sir. I do. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) Please state your full name for the record and spell your last name? l (b)(7)(C) Last name is spelled l~'b-)(7)_(_c) ______ _, SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C)

• Is Attorney Murphy representing you personally for the purpose of today's interview?

!(b)(7)(C) Yes, he is. SP ECIAL AGENT l (b)(7)(C) Does your employer require you to have an attorney present when you are interviewed by the NRC OI? l (b)(7)(C) . No, sir. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) Were you threatened in any way with adverse action if you did not elect to have corporate counsel here today? (202) 234-4433 l (b)(7)(C) I ~------~ No, sir. SPECIAL AGENT l (b)(?)(C) Did either corporate NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCR I BERS 1323 RHODE ISLAN D AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.n ealrgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 l2 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 2l. 22 23 24 25 6 counsel or a company representative instruct or suggest to you how you should respond to the line of questions presented by OI this morning? l (b)(7)(C) I ~-------J= No, sir. SPECIAL AGENT l (b)(l)(C) Will Mr. Murphy's presence hinder your testimony in any way? l (b)(7)(C) No, sir. SPECIAL AGENT l (b)(l)(C) L Do you understand that you have a right to a private interview with me at a time of your convenience? l (b)(7)(C) I ~------~t, Yes, sir. I do. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(7)(C) Thank you. Mr. Murphy, could you please introduce yourself for the record? MR. MURPHY: My name is Timothy J. Murphy. I'm a partner in the law of Fisher & Phillips located here in San Francisco, California and we are counsel for Tetra Tech EC, Inc. in the NRC matter which you have previously identified. SPECIAL AGENT~: And are you acting as a personal representative for ... r_)(-l)-(C_) __ __.l f or today' S interview? MR. MURPHY: I am. SPECIAL AGENT !(b)(7)(C) !: Should you determine that there's any conflict of interest as you are also (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COU RT REPORTERS AND TRANSCR I BERS 13 23 RHODE ISLAND AVE .* N.W. WASHINGTON , D.C. 20005-3701 www .nea t rg ross.co m 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 7 counsel to Tetra Tech what would be your course of action? MR. MURPHY: The course of action that I would follow would be to follow the rules of professional conduct of lawyers that practice in the State of California. And generally, that is that when there is a conflict of i nterest that arises between two people that you represent, you identify the conflict of inte rest to the .individuals and under certain circumstances after you fully explain that conflict to them they can waive that conflict in wri ting and you can continue to represent both and t ha t would fall within the rules of professional conduct. (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT Thank you. (b)(7)(C) (b)(7)(C) in what capacity are you employed with Tetra Tech? l (b)(7)(C) I ' m a l (b)(7)(C)

---

'

of record. SPECIAL AGENT l (b)r)(C) I= How long have you been in your current position? l (b)(7)(C) Al most ... r_'\7-X C-) __ ___. I'd say~ r)(l X C) (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT How long have you been employed with Tetra Tech? (202) 234-4433 NEA L R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASH I NGTON , D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 1 12 13 14 1 5 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 8 _r_)(7-)(C_) ___ ......,I r X(X C) (b)(7)(C) What was your SPECIAL AGENT previous assignment at Tetra Tech prior to this? l (b)(7)(C) J (b)(l)(C) I was a 1 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) Prior to Tetra Tech where were you employed? _l (b_)(7_)(C_) __ __,!: Radiologically? My last job Wa S l.. n ~~1 l!'c 1 I for X'X C> r l(J)(C) SPECIAL AGENT-~~--' So before --af t er that posit i on and before Tetra Tech you did something n o n-r ad i ation? -'(b)-(7)-(C) __ ......,I: Non-r ad , yes. I had a )( ) i nt o t hat. (b)(7)(C) And when you were at SPECIAL AGENT ;n l (b)(J)(C l t h e site ... _ in what position, what kind of capaci t y were you in? ._l (b_)(7_)(_C) __ ___,~ e 1 xc 1 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(7)(C) Wha t is your profess io nal background consisting of? What have you typically done? Have yo u been in radiation most of your pr o fessional career, construction? What h as it been? (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON , O.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 J.5 16 17 l.8 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 9 l (b)(7)(C) I -------~: I started off in staffing. I r)PX C) did so well in that I got to go ana ________ ___. in r XlXC> r X>XC) for there, starting During that time I was looking I found a large DOE presence out staffing radiation protection technologists. Saw that they made great money, more c.han I was making. So I made a jump. From that point I I started off in the r 7KC') '--------=r b;:;;X;l X:;;C)======:::::::~ which was _ 1 1 b)( 'l(C) in_ That was a LJ (phonetic) job do ing source recovery and from there I went ba*ck to and Did a e 1x c , r or r x'lxc> '------;;;r b;;:;l(:;;;, x;;b=~-..... was on the road jumping job to job to job ,_ r Xl l(C) I 11 ______ __.a over. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C)

So your experience in the nuclear industry dates back about how long? l (b)(7)(C)

I would say D to present, (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT What are your duties and responsibilities in your current role? L..l (b-)(7-J(C_) __ ___.I : I am the (b)(7)(C) I I ._P.(b--)(7--)(C-) ___ __, _j (b_H 7_l(_c) __ _.!under -'b-)(_?J_(c_) _____ _, who is the.__ ______ __. l (b)(7)(C) I --------------------' to him and the Hunters Point Quality Control Department. (b)(?)(C) SPECIAL AGENT In addition to (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASH I NGTON , D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 10 l (b)(7)(C) do you have a responsibility for corrective action to those issues of noncompliance? l (b)(7)(C) Yes, sir. I do. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) Do you hold any certifications currently for the job for which you are in? l (b)(7)(C) I Certifications? I have lots of training certifications, yes. 8 PECIAL AGENT l (b)(l)(C) That's site stuff. Is there any national certifications? _!(b_)(7_)(C_) __ _.!: No, this wasn't site stuff. There's some national stuff, too. Shipping, DOT shipping. That just fell out of being current though. Nationally recognized by Ortech (phonetic) and Canberra (phonetic) as being trained along with Ludlum (phonetic) Instruments. Ortech? (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT Ortech, what is l (b)(7)(C) I ..... : They make gamma spec systems. And so does Canberra, along with Ludlum Measurements and that training was certified in calibration and repair. (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT ~---' So is it fair to say that with your experience, both with these various (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 132 3 RHODE ISLAN D AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005--3701 www .nea lrgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 11 certs you have and in the field, that: you have a pretty good awareness of what a nuclear safety concern is? point. l~b)(])(C) I ld l 'k h' k .... ____ __,: I wou 1. e to t 1.n so , SPECIAL AGENT ~: Hope so at l (b)(7)(C) Yes. yes. this SPECIAL AGENT !(b)(7)(C) !: To that same extent, are the em pl oyee s trained and*oriented on what issues are considered nuclear safety concerns, do the employees also know? l (b)(7)(C) I .... ____ __,~ Yes. We train per NUREG-1556. AGENT (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL What mechanism is used whereby employees can raise nuclear safety concerns? l (b)(7)(C) I ._ _____ __,: Al l the employees during our annual rad brief are shown the NRC boards. They are also given a line of communication by a car d I make that has all of the management's phone numbers, the rad safety phone number, health and safety's phone number. They are informed that we are in Region 1 King of Prussia and they are described where the boards are at. We have two NRC boards on site. One resides in a building where a lot of those craft folks take breaks. The other one is up in the main office (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrg-oss.com l 2 3 4 5 6 7 B 9 10 11 12 1.3 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 12 building where the management type hangs out. SPECIAL AGENT L_ ___ J So if an employee has a safety concern, they see something, they can obviously --they can go to the NRC. !(b)(?){C) !: They are informed in training please start with us. SPECIAL AGENT l (b)(7)(C) I: Because you're management. ~l (b_)r_)(_c)~~--'!: Start with me. If you don't think I'm doing a good job, please contact (b)(?)(C) ~'(b_l(7_)(C_)~~~~l who is the~l'b-)(7_l(_c)~~~~--'~ If he fa ils to satisfy you, please call the NRC. (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT Is there a way that em ployees can raise those issues anonymously or can they fil l out --in the power plant world, they call it a condition report. .... !(b_)(7_)(C_) __ ....,!: Yes . SPECIAL AGENT l (b)r)(C) !: Do you guys have an equitable form such as a condition report that can be filled out by an employee and sent in without --sent in anonymously? ZIP slip. l (b)(7)(C) I ~-----~: Yes, we do. That's called the (b)(?)(C) SPECIAL AGENT Okay. And is that a hard copy document or is that in a database? (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www .nealrgross.com l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 1 8 19 20 2 1 22 23 24 25 13 _!(b-)(_~_(c_)----___.!: That is a hard copy document that goes to database. (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT Who does the ZIP slip go to? _, (b_)(7_)(C_) ___ l l (b)(7)(C) 1. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) So they go t o him and he transfers i t into the system? l (b){7)(C) l .~--------- He puts it into our database and what that does is it recognizes all the managers who that reporL would be value to and from there a report is generated and sent ouL to said managers for their reaction and/or repair of said problem. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) Is it possible that he d o esn't put that information out? It can kind of stop at him? l{b)(7)(C) No. SPECIAL AGENT !(b)(l)(C) L Conceivably? l{b)(~(C) l ~-----------J No, l get them. I still get them to this day. My name is included on t he ZIP slip, I get them. And I'm forced to do something. {b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT ,__ _ ___. And is that by procedure that if you're in cluded, if your name is included in any way that you also are required to get a copy? (202) 234-4433 .... !(b_)(?_)(C_) --...J!: Yes. NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS ANO TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE .* N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrg r oss.com 1 2 J 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 14 SPECIAL AGENT~: Is training provided to employees with regard to the use of that mechanism, ZIP slips and how they can report things up? Are they trained on that or informed about that? l (b)(?)(C) They are trained and I actually ... r_l()-X C_> __ __.I the phone numbers r:==J* That is . r X ll(C) I something It's a laminated card bui lt for ruggedness out in the field. The ZIP slips we discuss. Those are in envelopes by the state boards or the state hiring information. SPECIAL AGENT l (b)(?)(C) I: And what's Tetra Tech policy regarding employees' ability to raise safety concerns? How does that work? Are they allowed to do it? l (b)(7)(C) i ~- Oh, yes. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) It occurs. Are they protected once they do i t? l (b)(7)(C) . We pay them to do it. We actually have a raffle and the more of these ZIP slips t hat are turned in, we enter those names into a hat, if you w i ll, for a raffle. W e love ZIP slips~ It's even thoug h some of the issues brought. up may be very minor, those could turn into major obstacles later. (202) 234-4433 SPECIAL AGENT (b)(7)(C) .__ _ __. And employees, are NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCR IB ERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON , D.C. 20005-3701 www .nealrgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 11 12 13 14 .15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 15 they also advised of the fact that they are protected once they raise a safety concern? Do they get apprised on the concept of protected activity o n ce they raise a concern, they can't be retaliated against and they should not be treated in any disparate way? l (b)(7)(C) We go over that and we actually have an NRC published document that we hang on our NRC boards to inform them as well. (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT ___ _. Is that also outlined in the handbook or procedural guide? -'(b)-(7)-(C J __ _.I : There i s a yellow handbook that all our employees get. And yes, it is outlined in t hat. (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT When layoffs occur, how is it determined which employees are laid o£f and whi c h are retained? ... r_)(l_)(_C) ___ ...,1: Usually by funding, our c l ient's funding. S P ECIAL AGENT l (b)(l)(C) I: So the funding predicates that somebody has got to go, but how is it determined who is going to go? ... r_)(7-)(-C) ___ ...... I= Well, starting at che top recently Jle had a situation where our base-wide funding was reduced. It was reduced significantly. So we had to get rid of two technicians in that group. (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COU RT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON , D.C. 20005-3701 www.neaJrgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 16 From there we looked at who was in the kit ty and those who made a better, all rounded tool were kept. When you are limited to the amount of tools in your tool box, you cry to find the one that can do che most jobs and --SPECIAL AGENT l (b)(?)(C) Most di verse skill sets stay? l (b)(7)(C) I ~------~: Exactly. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) Most comprehensive skill sets stay? l (b)(7)(C) I ______ __,: Exactly. SP ECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(G) Those who can on ly do one thing really good probably had to go? l (bl(7)(C) I ~------~: Correct. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) Wh en someone raises a safety concern via ZIP slips per se, and management takes ic in, they do the intake process, is it --does it stop at the site level or can it --or is it always run up the chain or does it depend on the issue? ~r-)(-7)-(C-) ---~I: These ZIP slips are ni ce because there's no way to cap on who gets the report. It flows throughout the entire company with regards to our management layers. S PEC IAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) So it's not a deal t O l (b)(7)(C) where it could just --it comes . (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AV E., N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 as I've www.nealrgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 lO 11 l2 13 14 15 16 ]7 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 17 heard him referred to. l (b)(l)(C) I l (b)(l)(C) love to l (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT (b)(7)(C) It comes desk and he says I don't want to deal with this, put this over here and it never goes anywhere. That's not really possible? l (b)(l)(C) I --~~~~__,: No, he enters those into the system and they go to all the PZMs {phonetic). The PZMs are the decision makers within each group, within a given expertise. SPECIAL AGENT~ Ok S b d ' l__J ay. ome o y is going to see it. l (b)(7)(C) So the site managers get it and it goes out to the PZMs. In the past, the president has received these. So I don't know at what level they start filtering for him, but these things get out quick and the phone starts ringing immediately. (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT._. __ __. Do you know Elbert Bowers? _r_)(7-)(-C) ___ ..... 1: Yes. SPECIAL AGENT l (b)(l)(C) How do you know Mr. Bowers and when did you first have contact with him? l (b)(l)(C) I Mr. Bowers has worked out at Hunters Point for various groups and what was the (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON , D , C. 20005-370 1 www.nealr:gross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 1 6 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 18 second part to your question, I'm sorry? SPECIAL AGENT~ When did you first mP-et him o r have contact with him? l (b)(7)(C) I met him probably within ffiJ t l>)(l)(C) l SPECIAL EJ AGENT : So that was r)(l)(C) l (b)(7)(C) Yes. SPECIAL AGENT l (b)(?)(C) I= And under what ci rcumstances did you initially have contact with him? Did you w or k for him? Was it just passing, you met h i m as you came on the job? Did you hav e a lot of i nteraction w it h him? !(b)(7)(C) He was the radiation safety officer for New World Technologies. That was the li c ense we were operating under at the time. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) So his name was on the license? l (b)(7)(C) As the --I don't know if his name was on the l icense, but I know that the company had made him the RSO at some time and had put that on a letter to file and had it hung up on their NRC board. (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT.__~___. So currently, you're the ((Cb))(?) I th 1 . . . t s your name on e 1.cense or is i l (b)(7)(C) I . ..__~~~~~~~ name on the --(202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHOD E ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.neaJrgross.co m 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 l 4. l!:> 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 .... l (b-)(7-)(C_J __ ___.I: l (b)(l)(C) 19 I na m e is on the license as the l (b)m(c) ~n d I am listed on a letter to file h (b)(7)(C) as t e or Hunters Point. SPECIAL AGENT~: ~r"e"'x;~x c ,:"") ---------. ~---------~l was with Bert. l (b)(?)(C) Correct. SPECIAL AGEN~(b)(?)(C) Which is ... r x_i_~C-) _____ __. At one point he was on the license? l (b)(?)(C) At one point he was on the license. Yes, sir. (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT : We're going to get back to that at some point. What kind of employee would you describe Bowers as? I want an honest assessment. _l (b)-(7)-(C) __ _.I: A complainer who would do nothing about his complaints. He would not --if there was something he saw in the field that was incorrect, he wouldn't come and instruct me to go fix it. I would be shown photographic evidence of said issue and it was almost as if there was supposed to be a celebration that we got them. SPECIAL AGENT So as an RSO and RSOR, he was in both positions, what was he required to do if he saw a safety issue? Was he required to not report it? Was he require d to fix it, then report (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COU RT RE POR T ERS AND TRA N SC R IB E RS 1323 RHOD E ISLA N D AVE., N.W. WASHI N G T ON, D.C. 2 0 005-3701 www .ne alrg ross.com J_ 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 20 it? What was he required --beca u se it soun d s like you're saying all he did wh e n he saw issues was just raise them and never fix them? l (b)(7)(C) I .... -----..Jt Yes. I don't know what he was supposed to do, but I know w hat I am currently doing. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(J)(C) And my assumption is that the duties are probably fairly consistent with what he was supposed to do as the RSOR ana ... r_x ,_x c_s ___ ___. r)(°i)(C) l (b)(7)(C) l Correct. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(J)(C) Unless the job description has changed a lot. I don't know if that's happened. _r_)'7-)(-C) ___ ..... I= Bert and I are two very different indivlduals. We operate very differently. I like to get into my work. I like to be out into the field. He spent a lot of time in his office. SPECIAL AGENT l (b)(7)(C) I But under the scope and direction of the job you do now, if you see things in .t h e field --.... l (b-)(7)-(C-) __ ....,l Yes. l (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT._ ___ _..... --as Bert did, a re you required to report those things? (202) 234-4433 l (b)(7)(C) Yes, I am. SPECIAL AGE N T (b)(7)(C) Are you required to NEAL R. GROSS COURT R E POR TE RS A N D TRAN SC R I B E R S 1323 RHOD E I S LAND AVE., N.W. WASH I NG T O N , D.C. 20005-3701 www .nealfgross .com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1 7 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 21 fix them or ensure that --or delegate someone to fix chem? l_(b_H 7_)(C_l ____ __,~ Yes, I am. (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT Bert was seeing th i ngs in t he field and he brought them up, but you're saying he wasn't delegating the repair of those issues. _r)-(7)-(C) _ __.L No, sir. He was not. SPECIAL AGENT l (b)r)(C) I= Did you have c onfidence in his abilities as the RSO? j (b)(7)(C) !: No . ----. (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT Why not? _!'b-)(_~_(c_i ____ __.!: He didn't have a whole l ot of fie l d time on dirt j o bs. He went into everything with a power plant mentality and that wasn't the case. Out at Hunters Point we were remediating soil that c ontains I w o u l d say I'l l give you a cap of around 2.5 or 3 picocuries per gram of radium. The reason we are remediating that soil is solely because it w as brought i n, it was an import that was brought in from a long, long time ago. No one cared about picocuries back then. So most of the material we're handling is less t han 2.S'picocur i es radium. We do get strontium hits from time to time, but everything is in the picocurie per gram range with the exception of devices that we (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHIN GTON, D.C. 2QOOS.3701 www.nealr9'oss .oom 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 22 find. Then we're talking about microcuries. I don't believe his actions were commensurate with the activity we had on site. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) Now have you ever worked at a power plant? l (b)(7)(C) I . No, sir. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C)

So what was the difference in his approach?

You said he had a power plant mentality and that I s not really transferrable to what you all do. What was his approach? l (b)(7)(C) I His approach was almost as if it was fuel on site and there was not. Now we still have to take the rad components seriously, but a t no time have we been working with material that could have (a) given the public a dose of more than 100 millirem a year. All of my --SPECIAL AGENT 1 (b)(7)(C) !: Below public limits. ~b-)(-l)(_c_) ----~': Yes. And all of my dosimetry within the past year has been zero reports, no dose. Before that we were using land hour (phonetic) that could re port down to one millirem. At that time we had a lot of onesies and twosies, but nothing over ten millirem ever. (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT So very, very low doses. (202) 234-4433 N EAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHO D E ISLAND AVE.. N.W. WASH I NGTON. D.C. 2000&-3701 www .nealr gr oss.com l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 12 1.3 14 15 i6 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 2 3 ... r_)(-7)(_C_) ___ .... 1: Very low dose. Ve r y lo w activity, yes. (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT B owers raised safety-related co n c e rns to you? l (b)(7)(C) I '-------~= Did he? SP E CIAL AGENT .__ _ _...., Yes . l (b)(7)(C) I ._ ______ __,: I saw a lot of photos. (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT ___ _. Ela b orate on that. l~b)(7)(C) I ._ ______ J: Well, for instance, there was a time when Mr. Bowers was out on his radiological i ntegrity dri v e down. And he had observed a w ater b r eak station that someone had put right inside of an RCA. Now this was an a r ea that was not delineated w i th ro pe. It was delineated with T posts and a p os t i ng every 50 feet. Well, because the lack of that rope someone had accidentally put that break station in t o an RCA. He had observed that on his drive down and he had taken a photo. He came back and showed me t he photo. I asked h i m if he had righted the situation. He said no. At that point, I just assumed the responsibility and went out and pulled that station that weighed no more than 25 pounds rig h t? (20 2) 234-44 3 3 SPECIAL AGE N T l (b)(7)(C) I: The water cooler , NEAL R. GROSS C OU R T REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBER S 13 2 3 RHODE I SLAN D A V E., N.W. W ASH I NGTON , D.C. 2 000 5-3 701 www .n ea lrgr oss.co m l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 11 12 13 1 4 15 16 1 7 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 24 .... r_)(7-)(-C) ___ ...... I= Yes. On to the appropriate side and hit it with a frisker to make sure there was no contamination. We went on with life. We made a deficiency notice of that and went on. (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT._ _ ____. Was that the only incident that s t icks out in you r mind? .... l (b-)(7-)(C-) __ ..... I: There were some that were brought up t o day during our earlier meeting, but there was an incident where we had been doing a characterization of some drums that had radium dials and devices. And the Navy wanted each and every one of those devices characterized. We brought in an outside contractor who had a gamma spec system and hit ea c h on e up and characterized. We had some t ime away from that job because we had found UXO (phonetic) and we had to stop and bring in a UXO expert and once we had done that, we went back to work. On about the second or third day of going back to work, we opened up our source room where we kept all our drums and we noticed a seventh drum. We only had six drums. One drum was for strontium devices. The rest were for radium dev i ces. I now had a seventh drum with sources in it. I questioned how that could have happened and turned that over to the quality department because (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 25 I figured at that time someone had gotten into that building and done that . And there were only four people at that time who knew the combination into that building. SPECIAL (b)(7)(C) AGENT How was that situation managed? How was it adjudicated? l (b)(7)(C) I (b)(7)(C) -~~~~__.: I filed a complaint with l (b)(7)(C) with Quality Control. I alerted (b)(l)(C) .__ ___ _. l (b)(7)(C) and informed !(b)(7)(C) ! l (b)(7)(C) l (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT (b)(7)(C) And was an investigation or an inquiry conducted as to how that seventh drum was the source --got in there? l (b)(7)(C) I= Yes, sir. An investigation was conducted. (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT L...----' What was the final determination? _r i_(7)-(C) ___ ,= There was no determinat i on made. (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT .__ _ __, Who were the other people that had access to the code? people knew the code. You said four I had l (b)(7)(C) (202) 234-4433 l (b)(7)(C) I= Yes. Myself, l (b)(7J (C) l and l (b)(7)(C) NEAL R. GROSS COURT R E PORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-370 1 I , and then I* I can www.nea l rgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 1.4 15 16 1.7 18 1.9 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 l (b)(7)(C) spel~ the last name for you. I t's a tough one._ l (b)(7)(C) I And myself. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(7)(C) And was this an issue t hat Bert subsequently raise, that seventh drum? ..... l'b-)(7)-(C_l _ ___,!: No

• _ _J (b)(7)(C)

I SPECIAL AGEN~L-Who discovered the additional drum? _r_)(7-)(C-) __ ....,~ l (b)(7)(C) I when we went in to start our characterization backup. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) So the seventh drum, was it surveyed accordingly and locked or put where it was supposed to be? ... l (b-)(7-)(C_) __ I: It was in the room where we kept all the drums, containing the devices. That inner room was locked and then the outer room was locked as well, the outer building was locked as well. SPECIAL AGENT~: And all appropri ate reports were made on that issue? l~b)(7)(C) I y --~~~~__,= es, yes. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) So when Bert brought things up to you, were they always documented? Did you always document them? l (b)(7)(C) I No. He typically stepped in and would document first, almost even before investigating. Photos would immediately be taken. (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 r~(C) 1 SPECIAL AGENT 27 Was he emailing these photos to anybody? l (b)(7)(C) I .... _____ _,: I never got them. I got shown snippets here and there. In fact, today on our earlier talk I saw photos for the first time that involved me. (b)(7)(C) SPEC:AL AGENT Were you ever advised by other members of management of Tetra Tech that Bowers caised safety issues with them? .... l (b-)(7-)(C_) __ __,!: No . "" (b.,.,,)(7~)(~C)--, SPECIAL AGENT The nature of Bowers' safety concerns, were they all rad-related issues? ... r_)(-7)-(C-) __ __.l No. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) What were some of the other t hings he raised? ._!(b_)(7)_(C_) __ _,j: In some previous photos from today, I mean I've just dis co vered this, but I guess he had some issues with trench safety, possibly. SPECIAL AGENT j (b)(l)(C) !: Anything else? l (b)(7)(C) !: These were random photos , but stuff such as caution tape being down, but the area where the caution tape was hung, it didn't need to be so I don't know whac you would call that. (202) 234-4433 .... l<b)_(7)_(c) __ _....I = I think he wants to know NEAL R. GROSS COURT R E PORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www .nealrgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 a 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 28 whether at the time he raised the issues, not the photographs. l (b)(7)(C) L Oh -* , no. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C)

A t the time l (b)(?)(C) !: No, I ' m sorry. SPECIAL l (b)(7)(C)

AGENT And even with respect to when he did raise the issues, were some of t hese more --were they industrial safety issues or was it a combination between the radiation stuff and maybe OSHA stuff? !(b)(7)(C) 1 would say most of it was rad i ation , but from time to time you would get an industrlal hygiene issue or an OSHA issue , yeah, not often. SPECIAL AGENT ~: w.,., h ,,,.a ,,,,, t ,_ _ __Jli,------' r ... x_,_~_> ________ _.I than Bowers did as the !(b)(l)(C) Everything. Everything. First thin g, the dosimetry logs were co mpletely found not in good shape. T hey were simply photocopies of TLDs that had come in from the TLD supplier, sometimes with names written on them. Sometimes there was a TLD log, but they were never complete. So when ... r_)(-7)-(C-) ----J X 7 XCJ wich hard copy backup. Another thing I do is my training runs a (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 1 2 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 29 lot longer~r_x i_~_)------......1 I try to provide more details thac are site specific versus general rad. I want to make sure all of our folks are informed as to the conditions of our site that our l icense is covering. On top of that r ... x_,_xCJ----------------------1' probab l y I would r')()X C) say 40 percent of my time is spent~----------------------J Bowers' time was probably 10 percent or less. I also believe in an open door policy where anyone with concerns can come by, voice opinions. If it's something that requires more investigating, we do it or else we'll pull out a procedure or a work document to satisfy questions. SPECIAL AGENT (b){l)(Cl maintain an open door policy? (Pause.) Did Bert l (b)(?)(C) I= I don' t think he did. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) Why is that? not ~'(b_)(_7)_(c_)------~~ The craft folks had a lot of When l (b)(7)(C) r adiologi c al questions ..... -------------------------' And I don't feel that they had a place they could go because Bert was only interested in the folks he could manage which would be rad folks. He wasn't really open to the craft asking questions and unfortunately they were the ones who do a lot of our work and need to have questions answered. (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCR IB ERS 1323 RHODE ISLAN D AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 30 I've come across instances where dosimetry was lost or missed, but I found no arrears report, no investigation report done as to why that dosimetry was missing. (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT That's supposed to be accounted for? l (b)(7)(C) I Yes, sir. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) Did you find Bert to be active to the point that he was really concerned with compliance and employees operating in a safe manner radiologically? l (b)(7)(C) No. I found him more interested in get ting evidence to say II I gotcha. 11 And using that as a political stronghold on the site. (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT Who determined that Bowers would no lon ger be working at Hunters Point? that he that? l (b)(7)(C) !(b)(?)(C) Bowers. (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT Bowers determined would no longer be working at Hunters Point? ~l (b_)r_)_(c_J~~~~I= From what I understand, yes. (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT Where did you hear .... r_)(7)-(C) __ ...... 1: (b)(7)(C) I heard that he --him and had gotten into an argument over a difference and that Mr. Bowers said "I'm going to have (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISL.AND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON , D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 31 to resign and call the NRC" SPECIAL AGENT E::]: Where did you hear that? l (b)(7)(C) _r_)(7_)(_C) ___ _.I= l (b)(7)(C) From. (b)(7)(C) l (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT . ir l (b)(l)(C) !: Yes. ,_ ____ _. (Paus e.) (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT .__ _ _, So what was or do you even know what the actual deal was with Bert's employment? Was he transferred? Was he put on administrative leave? What was the nature --l~b)(7)(C) I ~------~= After the argument? SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C)

• Yes. _r_)(?-)(-C) ___ _.1: I believe that he was repositioned at A lam eda Naval Air Station. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) Was that because of the argument?

l (b)(7)(C) No. He had stepped down from his position at Hunters Point and was still an employee. No one had done anything. I mean this was Bert's move and from what I understand they placed him over there wh ile this investigation was being done. (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT Did he go over there to be the RSO? (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON , D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 J..2 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 32 No. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) What was he? l (b)(7)(C) There was already an RSO over there. I think they were having him track s?me cost s or do something administrative. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) Do Tetra Tech employees also have a respons ibility to notify the Navy as it relates to safety-related concerns? ~l (b_)(7_)(C_)~~--'!: Yes. SPECIAL AGENT {b)(?)(C) How is that done? What's t he mechanism? I know you said with the NRC there is the NRC cards, the notification is available, ho w to reach the NRC personnel. Is it the same thing with the Navy? ... r_)(7-'(-CJ ___ ..... I= That is done through two channels. One is done through the project manager and one would be the RSO from the level that I see. manager? (b)(?)(C) SPECIAL AGENT (b){?)(C) S PEC I AL AGENT (b)(7)(C) Who is the project Was Bowers retaliated against in any way for raising nuclear safety concerns? (202} 234-4433 ~l (b_)(?_)(C_) __ __,!: No . SPECIAL AGENT L] Did you have any NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE I SLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON , D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 33 discussions with Bowers following his departure from the site? l (b)(7)(C) l -------J Yes. ,....,.---. (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT What did the discussion consist of? l (b)(7)(C) I= I was told to get with him over the dosimetry issue. We had dosimetry logs that . l (b)(7)(C) I were not in good shape and through..._ ______ __, he would set up meetings for Bert and I to get together r*w, x ci I and~--------~ if you will. go? SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) _l (b-)(7-)(C_) ___ !: Yes. (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT And did that occur? How did that process l'.b)(7)(C) i ~------~~ It was uncomfortable. SPECIAL AGENT Why was that? """l (b.,.,.,)(7 ,..,.)(C.,..)-----., . : Because all the man had for records was photocopies and some makeshift logs and when I looked at the logs and l ooked at the photocopies of the TLDs, we still didn't have enough information to reference to make an issue log. So at that point~r-~_xq ______________________ __J r>!1X CJ b ~-------~1 osimetry in the past to employees we still had on record for current. And I wasn't real happy (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-370 1 www .nealrgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 a 9 JO 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 34 I as an RSO that is your job, that is your domain and he was not doing it. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(7)(C) Did site management. ever identify to you that Bowers was a trouble maker or wasn't looked upon in a favorable light? l (b)(7)(C) No. (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT Does Tetra Tech follow a progressive discipline policy? l (b)(7)(C) I ~------~: Progressive --I haven't been disciplined. (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT ._ _ ___. Have you see anybody else disciplined and in the manner in whi c h they've been disciplined? Generally, if you get in trouble for something the first time, you get a warning. And then it goes to written and then it goes to verbal, written, and then l (b)(7)(C) I ~-____ __,: I've seen lots of warnings and log book entries made. I have not seen anyone perform a write-up on anyone else for disciplinary action. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(7)(C) Okay. Is that because management just is oblivious or avoiding these things or because the environment there is one that you all just take corrective action, move forward and operate efficiently? (202) 234-4433 l (b)(l)(C) I _._ ____ ___.: You got part of it there. In NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHOD E ISLAND AVE., N.W , WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 1 6 1 7 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 35 the end, we try to document what we've done wrong. Put that in a deficiency log, have a corrective action in place to try to prevent whatever happened from happening again and go on from there. But also --what was that question again? I want to make sure I'm answering this right. (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT Relative progressive discipline. to l (b)(7)(C) Progressive discipline, everyone is pretty good in the fact that once they've been warned on something, not to do it again. We don't have too many repeat offenders. For instance, if you miss a sign out on my RWP log, you take a day off. And that may sound harsh to some, but I would like to remind them that_r_x ,_x c_> __________________ __,~ho had co take a day off. In o rder to achieve compliance we had to start putting rules down and so far it's done nothing but help the program in th e way that we might have one or two individuals a month miss a sign out, whereas under the Bowers regime I was to ld to fill in the So L (b-X 7-){C)--------------------------------___Jl t 0 blanks by him. . . the worker where it ought to be versus the responsibility falling on middle management to make things look good. (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AV E .. N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www .nea l rgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 3 14 ]5 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 36 SPECIAL AGENT I:::]: Okay. And when you worked as a L X7)(C) and Bert was RSO, it was not that way? l (b)(7)(C) I= No. (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT Was progressive Jb X l)(C) L discipline when the "'t_..._ __________ .., 1 nd you were r ... bXl_XC_> __ ..,I and he was the RSO, was that even an issue then? ... r_)(7_, ,_c) ___ ..... I: No. There was no --I've never been disciplined by Mr. Bowers. Company-wide, the only discipline that we would be able to offer would be internally within our company. Most of the technicians that work for us are subcontracted, so I haven't seen anyone be disciplined at Hunters Point. Has it happened in the past? Yes. But I was not privy to it. I haven't seen such action go down. SPECIAL AGEN'l' ~: How does Tetra Tech identify performance concerns to ics employees? Say you got an issue with somebody in the work they're performing. How would you convey that? Is it in writing. Is it a conference call with somebody? How does that go about? ... r_)(7-)(_c , ___ ....,!: Well, you have a yearly evaluation that your technical lead will provide to you. Our technical lead or my technical lead right (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1 7 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 37 now i S l (b)(7)(C) 1* A couple months back I got t ime to sit down with him and go through the evaluation. I was asked if I had any questions. I stated no and I signed the evaluation and w e're good for another year. (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT Had Bowers ever been placed on a Performance Improvement Plan as far as you know? l (b)(7)(C) I ~-~~~~----1

N ot that I'm aware of. (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT Had Bowers been subject to progressive discipline in any way? l (b)(7)(C) I ~-~~~~---= No. No. Not that I'm aware o f. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(CJ : Were there any other employees that raised safety-related concerns who were invar i ably laid off, transferred, or subject to ad v erse action? l (b)(7)(C) I Not that I'm aware of, no. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) You said an inves t igation was conducted relative to Mr. Bowers raising issues and then resigning?

l (b){7)(C) I ~-~~~~___.

Yes. ---(b)(7)(C) Do you know who SPECIAL AGENT conducted the investigation?

(202) 2 34-4433 l (b)(?)(C) I believe NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND T RANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE .* N.W. WASHINGTON , D.C. 2000&-3701 that (b)(7)(C) was www.nealrgross.oom 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 1 1 2 1 3 14 15 16 1 7 16 1 9 20 21 22 23 24 25 38 ... r_)(-7)-(C-) ------J'* with some of the on-site investigation that happened, but that was mainly headed up by ... r_)(-l)(_C_) __ .... I and l (b)(?)(C) 1-SPECIAL AGENT l (b)(?)(C) !: Do you believe that Bowers was discriminated against for raising those safety concerns? .... l (b)-(7)-(C) __ .....,!: No. S PECIAL AGENT l (bJ(7)(C) I: Have you ever had any problems on the site as it relates to radiation p o stings? l (b)(7)(C) I ... ____ ___.: Mr. Bowers J.o ved his postings. Problems. The NRC has been out twice. They have foun d n o prob l ems with our postings. Has Mr. Bowers brought up i ssues with our postings? Yes. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) What were hi s i ssues? l (b)(7)(C/ I _______ _,: Oh, his i ssues with postings, i f someone accidentally backed a dump t ruck i nt o one and bent the T post that was holding the post i ng down, he would get angry. He would want a photo taken and then he would run around to a l l management showing what happened and he stated that no one respected the rad component and that no one respected him because a sign was bent. (202) 234-4433 l (b)())(C) I ... ---------------...1 on posting areas , NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nea l rgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 1 12 13 14 1 5 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 39 types of postings in areas. probably have as well. I be l ieve the others (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT Is there a requirement for the amount of s u rveys that shou l d b e conducted? Is it once a week, once a day? Is it survey and all ingoing equip m ent and outgoing equipment? What's the survey requiremenc? '-(b)_(7)_(c_) __ _,!: We have various types of surveys. W e have weeklies , monthlies. We've even got some biannual i es and we have a routine that is put in wri t ing t hat shows what needs to be surveyed. It's an Ex c el spreadsheet and a technician goes and performs a routine survey. Not o n ly will they type in their in i tials that they've done it, but the surveys go to t he base-wide rad superv i sor as well. He verifies that a l l the weekly surveys, monthly surveys, or biannua l s are done and there we go. The routine of those surveys was put together by ... l'b-)(_7)_(c_) ____ ___.! and l (b)(7)(C) !based upon the activity of the site SPECIA L AGE N T r)(7)(C) Are corners being cut as it relates to proper conduction of the radiation surveys? (20 2) 234-443 3 l (b)(7)(C) l ..... ___ ___,F No . SPECIAL ----(b)(7)(C) A GENT NEAL R. GROSS C OURT REPORTERS AN D T RANS C R I BERS 1323 RHO D E ISLAND AV E .. N.W. W ASHINGTON, D.C. 2000 5-3701 Are emp l oyees www.n e a lr gr os s.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 40 ensuring the safekeeping of all work-related areas and equipment? I mean for example, if you have some employees that go out to a portion of the site and they take out they take a Bobcat out there and tools, are those tools, are they being locked up at the end of the night or being surveyed appropriately and put back? Are all things being managed like they should? l (b)(7)(C) l They're being surveyed out in most cases. Sometimes we leave the heavy equipment behind in an area because that would require a pretty extensive survey. But as for hand tools and stuff like that, we're going to hit them up at the control point. If it's something that's leaving site and we would be doing an outgoing survey on it, throughout the week we probably generate somewhere between oh, I'm going to" say 8 and 12 incoming or outgoing surveys. We do have those in our database. They are assigned either a designator EO for equipment outgoing o r EI, equipment ingoing. r J C'X C J And yes, L.-----------' L.r_x~_c_> ________ ----JI a copy of those under a 10g sheet. SPECIAL AGENT l (b)(?)(C) I= And I got information that there was an issue that Bowers may have raised abouc an area not being chained up at the end of the night or the chain supposedly blocking off (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASH I NGTON , D.C. 2000~701 WWW .nealrgross.com

1. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 41 the area, c h at equipment had been left ouc by some of the craft staff? l (b)(7)(C) I ~-Yes. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) Would you care to speak to that? "'""l (b)-=(7)-(C) ____ l Sure. We discussed it a little earlier with regards to the combination locks. Bert wanted everything locked up and I did, too. I put in a combination that isn't already being used on site. We have general combinations to get you in the buildings.

Another set to get you into work areas. This was something I came up with myself because I wanted access to be very l i mited. I gave the RSOR at that time the combination because he should have access to radioactive materia l. The thing that got me is he sent in a crew, a team t o go investigate this area that I was work i ng in and no one was under an RWP when they did it. (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT So there was no radiological work perm i t for that area? l (b)(7)(C) L There was a radiological work perm i t. He was the one that requested the RWP, yet he never signed on to the log sheet that he would follow the rules. (202) 234-4433 I have it with me if you care to see it. NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT 42 Yes, I' 11 ta k e a look at that at the conclusion. l (b)(?)(C) I ._ _____ __,: Okay. SPECIAL AGENT l (b)(?)(C) I: But over al 1, employees were, areas were being secured accordingly? l~b)(7)(C) I -------~: Yes, a generator was left out one night. The photo I saw today, it was quite a story that was attached to it. We simply --we were given a generator to run our operation. That way we could start early in the morning, we go right in, and go to work. We had requested a pickup of said generator. ...l'b-)(_7)_(c_) ______ ..,l crew comes by and picks up all the commodities that we use and it was simp ly forgotten that night. My crew didn't stick around long enough to watch i t be picked up. We dropped the ball o n that. (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT Was a deficiency report written? l (b)(7)(C) I would have to ask~ l (b)(7)(C) I ._ ____ ---J on that. Because we typically, when it comes to property, you have to have $500 in damage and it wasn't stolen. (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT It was jus t left out. l (b)(7)(C) (202) 234-4433 So there was no damage. It NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCR IBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www .nealrgross.com

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 1 4 15 1 6 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 44 l (b){7)(C) I -------~: Not that I've seen, no. (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT Have you witnessed or observed incidents wherein radiation surveys were not adequately done, either done incorrectly, or not done at all? l (b)(7)(C) I've seen a few that have crossed my desk where they've been done incorrectly. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) How have the c orrecti o ns been managed towards those particular inc i dents? l (b)(?)(C) l --------J Are we talking about~r_x ,_x 6 ___ __, r x lXC'> I b k

• h d ? ~---------'

or ac int e ay SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) ... r_)'7-)(-C) __ __,I= Okay. Well, let's do both. Same building, 271. The crew that Bert had assembled to go in and investigate whac I was doing or do routine survey, whatever they claim they were doing (b)(?)(C) SPECIAL AGENT Who was on that team? l (b)(7)(C) I .... _____ _,: Susan Andrews and that was l (b)(7)(C) I al so .... --------~~ And they were instructed by Bowers to go do whatever he instructed them to do. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) Was that under the guidelines and the auspices of his duties to instruct them to go in and conduct that? (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASl-jlNGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www .nealrgross.com l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 1 5 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 45 l (b)(7)(C) L Certainly. SPECIAL AGENT ._r x_7_~_>_~ Okay. l'.b)(7)(C) I -* ____ __,= But once aga in , they didn't go in under an RWP. (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT Okay. And that is against procedure? procedure. them go in l .... (b)-(7)-(C_) __ __.I: That is strictly against (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT Okay. So he had .... l'b-)(7_l(_c) __ __,!: He had them go in. He claimed it was for purposes of rout i nes wh ic h was fine*. They also w ent i n and d i d dose rates on these drums. When the report go t to me, it was quite apparent that someone didn't know how to use an ion chamber. And._f&x_i_x c_i _______________ __.!this is r~X C J all wrong. _ my technicians do the survey. Thank you very much. Because they had be en using ion chambers every day during the characterization process of those 2800 devices. SPEC I AL AGENT !(b)(7)(C) !: Okay. And so that was when Ber t was the RSO? ._r_)(?-)(_c_J __ ___,j: Yes, sir. (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT In terms of since l (b)(7)(C) I .... ------------------' ' when have you seen (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHING;f'ON , D.C. 20005-3701 www.nea l rgross.com l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 4 6 instances where people have employees have incorrectly conducted the surveys? l (b)(7)(C) I= Oh, I I ve seen situations whe r e on our surveys, on our outgoing, we will actually take a physical picture of the equipme n t that has the outgoing and then we will place smear locations on t.hat photo. I've seen instances where I go through and one or two of the smear locat i ons might be missing. One, two, three, wait, where's four? There's nothing in the special notes saying four was inside the cav (phone~ic) of a piece of equipment or something like that. So I will reject those and say we need to have a complete and full report here. SPECIAL AGENT l (b)(?)(C) I: Okay. Does Tetra Tech at Hunters Poinc work under the assumption of a safety conscious work environment? l (b)(7)(C) I Y Ab 1 t l es. sou e y. SPECIAL AGENT e l x c, I= Did Bowers develop a reputation as a stickler for radiation safety and protection? .... l (b-)(7)-(C_) __ _,!: He developed an image for something, but I w ouldn't say that would be it. That would be quite honorary. No, he did not portray the image of radiation s afety. H e portrayed the image of wanting to control production through radiation (202) 2 34-4 433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT R EP O R T E RS A ND TRAN SC R I BE RS 1323 RHODE IS LAND AVE., N.W. WAS H I N GTO N , D.C. 20005-3701 www .nea lrgross.com l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 1 4 15 16 17 18 1 9 20 21 22 23 24 25 47 safety, yet the radiation safety he was requiring was no t commensurate with the activity of the materials we have at the site. (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT Which goes back to that whole ideology of treating it like a power plant? l (b)(7)(C) I _.__ ____ __,: Yes, sir. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) Okay. l (b)(7)(C) I *------~ I hope I answered that clearly for you. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(7)(C) I think so. Were you privy to any c onversat i ons or meetings with Tetra Tech management regarding Bowers' safety concerns and his status of employment? l (b)(7)(C) I: No . ---(b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT Have you ever raised safety-related issues during the tenure of employment at Hunters Point and Tetra Tech? l (b)(7)(C) I ~------~= Yes. SPECIAL AGENT-j (b-)r-)(-C)~I: Were you subject to any adverse act as a result of raising those safety concerns? concerns (202) 234-4433 l (b)(7)(C) I= No, sir. SP E CIAL AGENT (b)(7)(C) Were addressed accordingly? l (b)(7)(C) I: Yes, they were. NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHING T ON, D.C 20005-3701 your safety www.nealrgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT 48 Do you f e el that the radiation protection program at Hunters Point is sufficient? l (b)(7)(C) I feel it is sufficient for the activity we have out at Hunters Point. b elieve it's improving. And I effectively effectively program? (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT L...--...J And are employees abiding by the RP program? r)(l)(C) I: I'm sorry? SPECIAL AGENT (b)(7)(C) Are employees abiding by the radiation protection l (b)(7)(C) I -------~= Yes, they're trying, yes. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(7)(C) You say they' re trying. Is that to say they haven't always? l (b)(7)(C) I -------~f There have been lapses in the past on certain things but there wasn't enough involvement by the past radiation safety officer to r J(7 XCl I Rrnxci1 correct them . ._ _________________

---

1 and lC XCJ And if I see something I try to get all eyes and ears present and come up with ideas on fixing it. (b)(7)(C)

SPECIAL AGENT Does that lend to the fact that maybe there were things going on that were never even addressed because he didn't s ee them? (202) 2344433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT R E PO R T ER S AND TR A N SC R IB E RS 1323 RHO DE ISLAN D A V E., N.W. WAS H I N GTON, D.C. 20005-3 7 01 www.nealr gr oss.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 49 l (b)(7)(C) I ~-------= I believe so, yes. SPECIAL AGENT~: And is it to assume to some extent that the craft employees didn't have the knowledge to really know? Or did they have questions? Because in the beginning we talked about most employees should know what a nuclear safety --l (b)(7)(C) Right, right. (b)(?)(C) SPECIAL AGENT But then you also ._ _ __. mentioned that the craft employees had questions and (b)(7)(C) you got on as the ._ __ l (b)(?)(C) I ~------~= Correct. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) So were there just kind of some gray area items that were going on in the field and they didn'L know how to address them? l (b)(?)(C) I= l think there migh t have been things going on out in the field and when he did come out of his office and did see something, instead of trying to correct it, he was on a fact-finding mission, i.e., the camera. Hence, the water break station we talked about. That could have been right then and there pulled to the right side of the RCA and repaired. And then the following day at the morning meeting, the kickoff safety meeting that we have at 7 o'clock should have been addressed with the entire crew. (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCR IBE RS 1323 RHODE I SLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON , D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 1 12 1 3 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT And that wasn'c? 50 l (b)(7)(C) l ~-------' Thac was not done. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(l)(C) He just took the pictures and came in and said hey, this is what I saw. ~l (b-)(?_)(_C) ____ __,!: Yes, sir. SPECIAL AGENT ~: w ould How you respond to the stateme n t that Hunters Point is a n uclear s i te being run like a construction site? If someone said that to you, what would be your response? ..... l (b)-(7)-(C) __ __.l I would say the person that made t hat cal l is uneducated as to the cond i t i ons of the site. (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT O kay. I'm li sten i ng. ... r_)(7-)(C_) __ .... I: I would say that is a rather ignorant statement. And the reason I wou l d say that is I've had a lot o f involvement from our friends at . . * (b)(7)(C) the NRC and I've gone through one inspection wit~ ,__ __ _, l (b)(7)(C) I _ a coup l e weeks back. I went through an L-------' l (b)(7)(C i I aud i t w i th (phonetic) L__ ___ J It was a very thoro u gh aud i t, the most t horough audit I've ever been involved i n. And t hey seem to think we have a pretty good program. They pointed out some areas that were weaker and would like to see improvement and they also had a l ready seen proof that corrective actions were (2 02) 234-44 33 NEAL R. GROSS COU R T REPORTERS A N D TRANSCR I BERS 1 32 3 RHODE I S LAND AV E .* N.W. W ASH I NGTON , o_c , 2000 5~3701 www .neal r gross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 2l 22 23 24 25 being taken on chose weaknesses. That's how I 51 feel. SPECIAL AGENT r:::::]: Were you ever i nstructed by management to not document or write up safety-related issues by employees? l~(b-)(l-)(-C) ____ __,!: Never. SPECIAL AGENT r'm: 6 l Did Bert Bowers engage in protected activity by raising safety-related concerns and was ultimately punished by the compan y? .... l{b-)(7)-(C_) __ !: No * ----(b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT Mr. Murphy? MR. MURPHY: Nothing. Thank you. SPECIAL AGENT~: I have a couple of closing comments and remarks. Have I threatened you in any manner in exchange for your testimony? l (b)(7)(C) I ~-------'~ No, sir. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) Have I offered you any reward in exchange for your testimony? l (b)(7)(C) I ~-------: No, sir. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) Has it been given freely and voluntarily? l'.b)(7)(C) l ~-----___.t Yes, sir. SPECIAL AGENT (b)(?)(C) Anything else you would like to add to the record at this time? l'.b)(7)(C) I .... ____ _,= I would like to show you those documents that we discussed earlier. (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCR I BERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W, WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www .n ealrgross.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 52 (b)(7)(C) SPECIAL AGENT We can do that offline. For the record, l (b)(7)(C) !will provide some documents that were referenced earlier such as the audit report, correct? l (b)(7)(C) I The audit report and the RWP that covered the work done in Building 271. SPECIAL AGENT E]: Those items will be reviewed and provided at a later date and time. The time is now 12:17 p.m., Pacific Standard Time. This interview is concluded. (Whereupon, at 12:17 p.m., the interview was concluded.) (202) 234-4433 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www .nealrgross.com C ERTIFICATE This is to certify that the attached proceedings before the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission in the matter of: Name of Proceeding: Interview of l (b)(7)(C) Docket Number: 1-2012-002 Locacion: San Francisco, California were held as herein appears, and that this is the original transcript thereof for the file of the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commiss ion taken by me and, thereafter reduced to typewriting by me o r under the direction of the court reporting company, and that the transcript is a true and accurate record of the foregoing proceedings as recorded on tape(s) provided by the NRC. (202) 234-4433 (b)(7)(C) Official Transcriber Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc. NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPO RTERS ANO TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. W ASH INGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealr9ross .com EXHIBIT 15 Case No. 1-2012-002 Exhibit 15}}