Free Statement of Facts - District Court of Federal Claims - federal

Case 1:91-cv-01362-CFL

Document 195-4

Filed 07/27/2006

Page 1 of 36

EXHIBIT 9

Case 1:91-cv-01362-CFL

Document 195-4

Filed 07/27/2006

Page 2 of 36

O0001 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

3

6 UNITED STATES OF AMERICAand UNITEDSTATESOF AIVlERICA, ex 7 tel. JamesM. Stone, 8 -vs9 ROCKWELL INTERNATIONAL 10 CORPORATION, al., et 11 Defendants. 12 13 14 DEPOSITION OF EDWARD S. GOLDBERG / Plaintiffs, Case No. 89-M-1 I54

15 called for examination by counsel for defendants pursuant to 16 Notice, at the offices of Sierra NevadaReporters, 332 Ryland 17 Street, Reno, Nevada,at 9:00 a.m., Thursday, April 23, I998, 18 before Kristine A. Bokelmann, certified court reporter. a 19 2O 21 APPEARANCES: Separate Page.) (See 22 23 24 25 Reported by: Kristine A. Bokelmann, CCR#165

Goldberg-Defendant's

Depo

Page 1

Case 1:91-cv-01362-CFL

Document 195-4

Filed 07/27/2006

Page 3 of 36

00012 1 Confess or any administrative body concerning matters relating 2 to RockyFlats Plant? 3 A To myrecollection, I did not testify before

¯ 4 Congressor any administrative type tribunal, council, or so 5 on. Mydealings with Rockywere direct with mysuperiors in 6 Washington, D.C. 7 Q I'd like to take you back to your first day at the

8 plant¯ Do you recall what day that was? 9 A Could have been D-Day, June the 6th. I don't

I0 remember exactly. I think that was the date, June the 6th, 1I 1989. 12 13 Q A Why you refer to that as D-Day? do Because that is D-Day.That's whenwe invaded

14 Europe. That's whyit stuck in mymind. Wasthat the right 15 date? Do yon remember? 16 MS. HEJAZI:I'm not sure,

I7 BY MR. PLISSEY: 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Q A Q A Q It mightbe. Just seemedto stick in mymind. Right. It happenedto be a coincidence, Doyou recall what you did that day? MR. HESCH:Objection, Form.

THEWITNESS: got up in the morning and was I

25 picked up at myhotel by a car and driven with the deputy

Goldberg-Defendant's

Depo

Page 12

Case 1:91-cv-01362-CFL

Document 195-4

Filed 07/27/2006

Page 4 of 36

00013 I secretary, Mr. HensonMoore, Mr. Leo Duffy and others, to the 2 RockyFlats Plant. 3 BY MR. PLISSEY: 4 Q And do you remember any of the others you were

5 driven with to the RockyFlats Plant? 6 7 8 9 Flats. 10 11 Q A And who was that? Mr. Earl Whiteman, rode in the car with who I don't remember their names,no. Q What happened when you arrived at the plant? A Wewere met at the gate by the manager of Rocky

I2 Mr. Henson Moore into the plant, itself, while I remainedin the 13 car with Mr. Leo Duffy. 14 Q Was Earl Whitemanthe manager of Rocky Flats Plant

i5 as of June 6, 1989, or was it RushInlow? 16 A Ah, Rush Inlow. Nowyou're -- it was Rush inlow,

17 yeah. Mymemory not serving me well. Earl Whiteman is was the 18 previous manager. At the time I camethere it was Mr. Rush 19 Inlow. You'reright. 20 Q And what happened after you picked up and were met

21 by Mr. Inlow? 22 A Wewent to the RockyFlats office building, went

23 into the conference roomwhere a member the FBI, don't of 24 rememberhis name, asked me ifI was the manager of RockyFlats 25 and I said I was, and he handed mea search warrant. Rush

Goldberg-Defendant's

Depo

Page 13

Case 1:91-cv-01362-CFL

Document 195-4

Filed 07/27/2006

Page 5 of 36

00014 1 Inlow. The namenever did sit there, okay. 2 Q What did you do next? You've been served with a

3 subpoena. Whatoccurs after that? 4 A I go into shock. No, the FBI explained what they

5 wantedand howthey were going to do it, and I had to, of 6 course, meet with the staff for the first time and inform them 7 what was going on and then get organized. 8 Q Wasthis the first time you had received notice

9 that the FBI wouldbe out at the plant that day serving the 10 managerof the plant with a subpoena? 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 A Q A Q A Q A No. When the first you heard about that? is The day before. Andwhere was that at? In Denver, Colorado. Andwhowas there for that? Deputy DOE secretary Mr. Henson Moore, Mr. Leo

18 Duffy, and others. 19 Q Andyou don't rememberthe names of the others at

20 this point? 21 22 A No, Idonot. Q Did you ever have any discussions with anyone

had 23 concerning the first notice DOE received that the FBI would 24 be serving a subpoenaout at the RockyFlats Plant? 25 A Not before June the 5th, if that was the day

Goldberg-Defendant's

Depo

Page 14

Case 1:91-cv-01362-CFL

Document 195-4

Filed 07/27/2006

Page 6 of 36

EXHIBIT 10

Case 1:91-cv-01362-CFL

Document 195-4

Filed 07/27/2006

Page 7 of 36

1 2 3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT

DISTRICT COURT OF COLORADO

5 6 7 8~

UNITED

STATES

OF

.AMERICA,

EX REL;

: " Civil Action No. 89-M-I154

Plaintiff

ROCKWELL ET AL,

INTERNATIONAL

CORP.,

: : . "

PAGES

1 -

155

Defendants. IC

Deposition 14 = I_ 16

of

W.

HENSON D.C. 15,

MOORE

Washington, Wednesday, April

1998

IS 2~ 2 2~ JOB NO. 106926 Reported by: Nancy Bond Rowland

Esquire Communications Ltd.
Cou~Reporting Worldwide

Sherry Roe &
202 429-0014 ¯ Fax 202 296-8652

1825 K Street, N~W.Suite 1212WashingVJn, Associa.tes, D.C. 20006

Inc.

Case 1:91-cv-01362-CFL

Document 195-4

Filed 07/27/2006

Page 8 of 36
Ii

1 2 for

A two

I weeks

was

there then month

on

the

day back

of for

the

raid

and week

then as I

and a

went or that

another that. did site? you

remember Q Rockwell A Q 8 9 i0 Ii 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 other under A assistant him in those deputy A are you? A Q

within And as well

two time

after frame on

during as DOE

deal

with

personnel

Yes. Does the term secretariat mean anything to

Yes. Does secretary, Yes. the I that consist the of under the secretary, the

and think

secretary? kind "in how of the we -law I'm books it. or the not sure

that's written

official

anywhere Q

definition, Can you

but tell me

that's the the were

understood relationship secretary

reporting deputy there? was the almost

relationship secretary The of what

between while you

and

under the

secretary and

the to

personal assist which had

secretary running That's

admiral factory

we

call Flats.

the why was

bomb the a

included selected

Rocky Admiral

president

Watkins.

He

nuclear

engineer.

SHERRY

ROE

& ASSOCIATES

Case 1:91-cv-01362-CFL

Document 195-4

Filed 07/27/2006

Page 9 of 36
13

1 2 3

virtually we call

everything defense over

in

the

department has the the

other

than

what

programs it.

which all

assistant came under

secretary
me.

Nuclear,

rest,

And 6 7 8 9 I0 ii 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 at was was and correct, A Q his A Q A Q A Q that A the we that's Yes. Is work? Yes. They

when what

you

refer said?

to

the

legal

arm,

is

that

you

that

a reference

to

the

general

counsel

reported

to

you?

Uh-huh. Is that yes?

Yes. Do you It outside. learned but you recall that a I how long raid of before would weeks, the FBI raid it

learned was only And about Admiral met

the matter

occur? maybe a how month it

don't

remember to

exactly the

it

enough

approach Polly

attorney the we to be

general, chief learned of

Watkins, with that the

myself, attorney was in

Gault, where going

staff, or

general fact

confirmed

there

S~ERRY

ROE

&

ASSOCIATES

Case 1:91-cv-01362-CFL

Document 195-4

Filed 07/27/2006

Page 10 of 36

1 2 3

a raid, on Rocky

a joint Flats. I don't

raid

by

EPA

enforcement

and

by

the

FBI

know had

how heard

we

had

heard it

about

it. in sure or he how we

Maybe 5 6 7 8 9 i0 ii 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 biggest with guns, the else passing got to

the

admiral the but us --

about

something I'm not him a

from word, with

attorney we asked

general. to meet

the meet

with -in

asked

I've

forgotten

very,

very

small

meeting. It condition know so be was that that cleaned revealed we would or to us not what in was going let or and on on

turn

anybody practices the whole

records up,

documents up,

bad

wouldn't

covered

ruin

investigation° Our private concern army was in the fact that was I think the there

the

country to FBI

stationed machine distinct was FBI

heavy

weaponry

compared And

agents, was a

automatic in high And

weapons. our at minds, Rocky if

there

possibility extremely let in.

because Flats,

security the

that started didn't

wouldn't guns what

be and

that

somebody guns, we

drawing know but

started something

brandishing really bad

might

happen.

SHERRY

ROE

& ASSOCIATES

Case 1:91-cv-01362-CFL

Document 195-4

Filed 07/27/2006

Page 11 of 36

I6

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 i7 18 19 20 21 22

tern~s of recognition, you're supposedto be able to recognize the person and allow themin. So I had the proper clearances. Andthe admiral and attorney general both felt I could get in and could bring in wliomeverwith me I wished, whereas an FBI agent trying to get in mightwell not havegotten in. Q So literally whentbe FBI caravan -- Wasit a

caravan of vehicles comingin? A Yes. As I remember about 70 agents between tbeFBIandEPA. Q On that first day you were kind of the bead vebicle? A I was the first person up to the gate. They all were behind me, yes. Funnyfeeling. Q A Q A I can imagine. Gunsin front of me and guns behind me. Great place to be. Funnyplace to be, rigbt. I've never beenin

a position like that before. Q But whenyou were referring to a military presence, was it your understanding those were at Rocky Flats or simplya military base? Moore-Defendant's Depo Page 16

Case 1:91-cv-01362-CFL

Document 195-4

Filed 07/27/2006

Page 12 of 36
2O

1 2 3

incinerators dumping Q A of

there toxic And Both

illegally, materials

another illegally. were

one

was

midnight

both of

of those

those

proved to be

not

to

be

true?

proved

not

true. it

There was.

5 6 7 8 9 I0 ii 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22

was When best some two

a I

third went

one, out we

and there, had in in

I don't the the

remember admiral

what sent

with

me

the and spent

people we Weeks

department, real

some

career and we

brought there. The

who

were

experts,

minute

we

went

inside in

with with me

the and

FBI

agents,

the

DOE

personnel doing of

went their two being or

immediately knew within

started a matter

own three made we

investigation. days were that the

We

sensational However,~ infractions done, these Q the members A Team. That and wild we

allegations began that those to were were

just

not

true.

find not of

what being

considered and to us

important not being were

followed concern

greater quite

than

allegations The of people what's

frankly. in the with Tiger called We you, Team? the Tiger that based were those

who

came

called they first

Ultimately was the

became one.

developed

SHERRY

ROE

& ASSOCIATES

Case 1:91-cv-01362-CFL

Document 195-4

Filed 07/27/2006

Page 13 of 36
21

1 2 3

on

that

experience in that Team, over the format and the

at Navy we sent next

Rocky of used them three that

Flats surprise at in or

and

the

admiral's teams. called them

experience We a took Tiger had a

inspection Flats,

Rocky to four lasts

every years as

single to go as

facility in two and or

5 6 7 8 9 i0 ii 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22

DOE do

surprise weeks Q

inspection and then do

long

three

a report. was that an area in which

The

Tiger

Teams,

you

had A

responsibility? It I depended. was the in On point this man of with the one, the the whole yes. The first and the

one,~yes. the Tiger

secretariat point Rocky team, Flats

administration Team at Rocky

dealing and

Flats

proposition. After was Tiger other were one of our would complex that we kind of that to me. split them to one up. me, of If it

laboratories report

answered If it was

the the

Team bomb

facilities with

which but or Team

the one of

laboratories the other nuclear to

certainly where

connected you

facilities weapQns, either

assembled Tiger

disassembled would report

generally Tuck or the

that

admiral.

S~ERRY

ROE

&

ASSOCIATES

Case 1:91-cv-01362-CFL

Document 195-4

Filed 07/27/2006

Page 14 of 36
24

1 2 3

out,

our

people There

found were

out lots

that of

was

not

the-case. found,

other by Mike

infractions Norton we here, did

and

some

of to

those him

mentioned

alluded 5 6 7 8 9 i0 ii 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 don't in A the quoted reports. true? being Q

having

mentioned

them,

find

as

true. The was next one on the list of of that I just environmental proved

false Do you

certification recall whether

federal

that

allegation

MR. No, Tiger In I Team

HESCH: We'd

Same have

objection. to go back and look

don't. report words,

because if somebody we

that's

a technical something harsh because loose in view a

thing. or of

other report .and

reported a pretty

didn't that, of of Q

something, could we saw of well there

took

that

have were

happened fairly

number terms

things the

handling

waste. of false certification those and were

But of

allegations environmental DOE took Took that

concealment allegations A

contamination, seriously? all was of this to

that

Certainly. remember whether

seriously. be the

I case or

found

SHERRY

ROE

&ASSOCIATES

Case 1:91-cv-01362-CFL

Document 195-4

Filed 07/27/2006

Page 15 of 36
25

1 2 3
4

not. there,

I

do I

remember would go

because on at the Rocky me

in

the

two

weeks

I

was the people,

inspection Flats what and with to

trips our

into DOE

various and along looking they in

buildings were

teaching

look

for. say

We'd

walk

5 6 7 8 9 i0 ii 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22

protective for this.

suits, We're see

they'd for was

"We're

looking it

that." were FBI we finding, agents found We found
we

I could were found waste found waste finding, it,

what the I

they

before

EPA,

before

the

whatever.

remember

distinctly stacked and labeled. through the

containers waste

improperly

stored. We a level

containers that

improperly had test not to gone

containers

radioactive radioactivity around things systems to with that that

measuring as their hadn't would I

d~termine We head found gear

of

remember. protective been allow cleaned

people off.

walking We found

properly,

ventilation dust

potentially

radioactive

escape. Those are the kind of things that I remember, but that. It

all I'm

of not

which sure sound

are how very

considered much weight

extremely the press

important, put on

doesn't

sensational.

SHERRY

ROE

& ASSOCIATES

Case 1:91-cv-01362-CFL

Document 195-4

Filed 07/27/2006

Page 16 of 36
26

1 2 3 4 weren't of turn

What following

that

shows

is and

the

fact

that-people in the handling that lax Island kind like the in

rules And

regulations you find and

nuclear shows can

material. you

when that's

that, that

a culture

lax, a Three

culture 6 7 8 9 i0 ii 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 of that event was

ultimately by to force at of the happen

lead way,

to we

Mile

which, going work or

predicted of the at

something fact that

because they

civilian power the

whether one of our

were

a nuclear didn't follow

plant same

facilities to of

level and Navy You

cultural in the

commitment handling

environment, materials

safety, that the Q yourself any the

health did.

nuclear

referred as

to you

some walked

infractions through. were

that Did

you find from

observed that on

you

evidence DOE A Q people No.

those site?

infractions

concealed

And

indeed, by

you

were by

able the

to

observe

those

infractions locations, A looking

simply is With that

walking

relevant

right? who could tell me what
I was

experts

at.

SHERRY

ROE

&

ASSOCIATES

Case 1:91-cv-01362-CFL

Document 195-4

Filed 07/27/2006

Page 17 of 36
33

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 I0 ii 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22

health,

and So

the

Court we

ruled got

we

were two

not. things the had law that we

when

there, had were

happened. were not

That exempt

court because

case we

settled

top-secret

installations. Number just state he said as of he left two, office the the prior Secretary to the was to Herrington world in. And the what so law out there, a bad what

revealed complex live won't up

repair was they you

bomb

cannot just

what

requires, folks. See

and you So

believe

what's

later. walked and the point the we in that law in with we and the a mandate complex probably the the physical training that that we had had

we law, obey that

to

obey

the to at

had

never up we the to had

had it, to

really of and make. that Rocky any

weren't changes and

terms

make

in

facilities had to

cultural So

change we

embarked into this

upon when whether as

cultural Flats DOE of on

change, happened.

and

we

were Q

already Do of you

recall

employees raid? some years

faced

the

risk A

indictment Yes, and that

a result risk went

the for

SHERRY

ROE

&

ASSOCIATES

Case 1:91-cv-01362-CFL

Document 195-4

Filed 07/27/2006

Page 18 of 36
34

1 2 3 4

afterwards, while I guess we were the

not on

just our

Rocky watch, Department

Flats. the

There one

was I

a

case where after in

first or

think went here

Justice

somebody fort right

civilian Maryland

employees for, as

at

a

military it, records, found

I remember

intentionally on be

filing

6 7 8 9 i0 Ii 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22

wrong

records, and

misleading they were I

environmental criminally liable

compliance, and actually So be came subject the

to jail

received with all the these

think

sentences. that laws, in the we had to

new

requirements

to

environmental like a real a

likewise civilian And of -I I time going faced at

criminal and

prosecution we had

sector, remember interceded trying to with these among

suddenly

chill. number for who

personally with get the

meeting Justice ground

with

Department rules not of a our real over

some

tQ

some and

they're we were

prosecute a

who

they're

because own DOE

substantial sites, our and

walkout there was as say

personnel of unease

feeling

contractors When you

well. walkout, you mean

Q
people A

a substantial

actually People

left? were saying "I'm going to retire. I'm

SHERRY

ROE

&

ASSOCIATES

Case 1:91-cv-01362-CFL

Document 195-4

Filed 07/27/2006

Page 19 of 36
35

1 2 3

leaving. the jail. very

I

am

not and going

going do

to

run I'm

this asked

plant.on to do and

behalf go to

of

government I'm not

what to do

that." I

These remember

people meeting

were with

concerned,

very

worried.

6 7 8 9 I0 ii 12 13 14 19 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 guess because were not A Justice never happened up was me or in some the plant,

Their they

concern ran of a

was risk

in of

part going

that to

if

they for

ran

jail

circumstances

out MR. That was

their

control? Objection. way of to looking me that did was the at about walk said at it, no. and We're bad it I Give the

HESCH: their in after

Department going to go he

talking somebody

something it or

unless misled with

intentionally So that

covered

people. the

negotiations that to off, point. have leave. case, out we the

Justice because bomb the it

Department we're

guidelines running And the after where two

people

factory Fort

Detrick, that

Maryland case came

I

that's these

was

after had law in a

things the

happened. because short we time

Suddenly were thereafter

exempt and

from

top-secret,

suddenly

the

SHERRY

ROE

& ASSOCIATES

Case 1:91-cv-01362-CFL

Document 195-4

Filed 07/27/2006

Page 20 of 36
67

1 2 3
4

at been

that

time.

Had totally

that

been

the

case,

it

would

have

handled Q A

differently.

Meaning? There "You're turned would out have of been no and mutuality. a press It would

have 6 7 8 9 i0 ii 12 13 14 and

been

here" to for the one

conference We any

probably have of

over

Justice minute

Department. had or us. we had

wouldn't knowledge or know

tolerated anything being about

being done at

fraudulently to mislead time.

illegally We did not

purposefully anything Q A You

that

that

still

don't? Had can I I we, assure know it would you him of too been he had have that. well. able been I can We're to

Still differently, the

don't. I

handled just still see

admiral. friends. the ceiling

just would for

sogial him off

nothave had

16 17 18 19 2O 21 22

get of

days

knowledge

that. Q By the to time you, its a do decision you recall was made or the Tiger

communicated Team had A the written

whether

issued Yes.

report? we knew we enough. would Whether very often we had

I think in or

report

not,

get

SHERRY

ROE

& ASSOCIATES

Case 1:91-cv-01362-CFL

Document 195-4

Filed 07/27/2006

Page 21 of 36
68

1 2 3

briefings, admiral part say Leo here's us

and probably Duffy what

I was

getting

briefings them or

as

well For "come point

as the in

the most and

receiving or we Ray Berube

together. both up would to this the

have In with

learned all Leo not

and

keeping 6 7 8 9 I0 Ii 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 was At a that tar as his probably decision

briefed.

probability before done and on he

admiral made the

conferred because This special

finally

this was the

was

lightly. I was this there part my strictly of the chore the

admiral or I say, lead it

assistant As bomb the

Rocky to

Flats

thing. the at DOE,

wasn't It

daily like

worry I

about was the up as

factory. more and

seemed I

longer enmeshed, me, was else. pick

more

became things there, was at I

more do

and

more By bomb

he,would the time

throw I as left I

and

this. of the

doin,g

much

factory

anything

But baby,

this

was

something this the twin

that duty Wall

he of

was we

torn, had to

it --

between remember

point hadn't weapons the

Berlin We the were

hadn't

fallen.

Glasnost nuclear war with

happened. perceiving Union.

still

building threat of a

potential

Soviet

SHERRY

ROE

&

ASSOCIATES

Case 1:91-cv-01362-CFL

Document 195-4

Filed 07/27/2006

Page 22 of 36
133

1 2 3

percent

weighting for was And new. when to

factor us to

being approve

new, or

then

it

was or

sent change

to

headquarters it. That

disapprove

it

came

to

headquarters, I'm not

I

think sure for. over over

it

officially 6 7 8 9 I0 ii 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 you'd merely be there Q A sure the which. But and and with. Q award in I've

came

Defense what would sit

Programs. our get down

forgotten Nancy in and

procedure it with we and me agreed Office. review DOE or

called go go

reality come

would and or

it it,

would we made the

a decision of and the

whether

disagreed

finding So fee you

Operations would by

Nancy held

these all

for

all the

contracts

within

weapons A

complex? I f~r a think time how they period. long a was or we the time The making period idea was roughly? was just to were pretty much all of them

And I that

think the

year

two. were

changes

being

followed. Q take by And into the during this is time data frame, that but one was by of the things not Teams?

account

gathered Tiger

Operations

Office

say

S~ERRY

ROE

& ASSOCIATES

Case 1:91-cv-01362-CFL

Document 195-4

Filed 07/27/2006

Page 23 of 36
134

1 2 3 of a

A Q

Yes, So

absolutely. if you had data and from you take the the Tiger Team got does by the report an this

particular fee report,

facility you

subsequently into account found

award 5 6 7 8 9 10 II 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 me do in the You it report Tiger A

would

accurately Team? Yes. As

reflect

problems

a

matter

of

fact, Leo

I

can Duffy

remember about and how into it. look

on

Rockwell know, over

case

conferring and I the and Leo

with would Team

Nancy about had

sit knew

down about

what

Tiger We

Rockwell account. Q you

performed.

certainly

took

that

Now, recall

at

the there

time was

period

following in the

the

raid, and

that about

interest fees being

press

Congrgss A Q A previously Flats Congress the

the

award

paid?

Yes. What Well, do as you recall about by to a t~e that? question you once interest asked the in

evidenced the report

about raid all whole hit, on

Congress, lot the of whole the IG

Rocky the

there Rocky

was Flats,

contracting report

system,

award

fee

system,

SHERRY

ROE

& ASSOCIATES

Case 1:91-cv-01362-CFL

Document 195-4

Filed 07/27/2006

Page 24 of 36
138

1

that

it

wasn't

a It It

matter wasn't was to a

of

picking of of

out

a

defenseless to to to look good the people

contractor. in the press. trying it. So heard that

a matter matter a

trying

trying trying

change have

culture, 5 6 7 8 9 i0 ii 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 BY MR. Q Thank you. the understand

make

change,

yes,

they and

made

that

argument. to it from,

Yes, as I

I

argument two

listened of the it, the end we

remember, came to

executives me. But at

corporate of still the

office day, we

that

see

determined we made Q amount was

having the And of

heard right

felt

the

decision

decision. believe fee you. the decision you made on

did

you

the

award

ultimately

awarded given all of

fairly the had

reflected

Rockwell's you had

performance observed and

deficiencies reported? A From

the

Tiger

Team

what MR.

we

knew

at I

that have

point, nothing

yes. further.

KOENIGS:

EXAMINATION HESCH: I just

BY

COUNSEL

FOR

THE

PLAINTIFF

have

a

few

questions.

When

you

were

SHERRY

ROE

&

ASSOCIATES

Case 1:91-cv-01362-CFL

Document 195-4

Filed 07/27/2006

Page 25 of 36

EXHIBIT 11

Case 1:91-cv-01362-CFL

Document 195-4

Filed 07/27/2006

Page 26 of 36

SEARCH

~'ARRANT

Case 1:91-cv-01362-CFL

Document 195-4

Filed 07/27/2006

Page 27 of 36

- 14 -

Case 1:91-cv-01362-CFL

Document 195-4

Filed 07/27/2006

Page 28 of 36

DOE officials ra~ed ~he heal~h and saf~y progr~m~ ~ Rock~

illegal di~charge~ in December 1988 (K 2.8) from uhe se',~ge ~rea~m~n~ facility.

Case 1:91-cv-01362-CFL

Document 195-4

Filed 07/27/2006

Page 29 of 36

regulatory personnel ~o conducu the necess~-y ~is. In i~s response d=ued ~y ~, 198~, DOE Indicated

peru."

U.S.C.

~

6~28(d)(2);

~U

DOE

Case 1:91-cv-01362-CFL

Document 195-4

Filed 07/27/2006

Page 30 of 36

004-007.

Outfnll 001, for instance, may only discharge into

Pond B-S which (a) exc.ed i~s capacity and (b) cannou handled ~y uhm plan~', spray Irrigation 9.14. Addiuionally, "[a]ny anticipaued h~chsions, producui~n increases, or process facility expanmodl-fi~

Discharge Mo~uo=ing RepOr~ ('DM~')

violanicns

~f

R~c~

~'

~D~

~

~oo~on

o~

V~olation pond B-3 (which

unau~horiz~d discharga

Creek )

- 96 -

Case 1:91-cv-01362-CFL

Document 195-4

Filed 07/27/2006

Page 31 of 36

Case 1:91-cv-01362-CFL

Document 195-4

Filed 07/27/2006

Page 32 of 36

EXHIBIT 12

Case 1:91-cv-01362-CFL

Document 195-4

Filed 07/27/2006

Page 33 of 36

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF COLORADO

4 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, EX REL. : 6 Plaintiff, : Civil Action : No. 89-M-1154 7 -vs: : 8 ROCKWELLINTERNATIONAL CORP., : ET AL, : 9 Defendants. : -X I0 ................................. 1I 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 JOB NO. 106928 Watkins-Defendant's Depo Page 1 Reported by: Nancy Bond Rowland Deposition of JAMESD. WATKINS 5

PAGES - 187 1

Washington, D.C. Tuesday, April 28, 1998

Case 1:91-cv-01362-CFL

Document 195-4

Filed 07/27/2006

Page 34 of 36

104

I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22

did, and that was the government. Q Andthat was the feeling that existed prior to the time you started malting changesto your understanding? MR. KOLAR: Objection to form and foundation. MR. KOENIGS: I'll question. A No, I don't think so. Q Sir, do you recall howlong before the FBI raid it was that you learned about the Department of Justice's intent to raid Rocky Flats? A As I recall it was about five days, but I don't -- Something like that. Maybe three days. It wasn't very manydays. It was within the weekbefore. If I knew date -- the day of the week the raid, the of I could probablygo back and recall specifically, but it wasaround I think three to five days ahead of time as I recall. It mighthave beentwo days. I don't know.It was shortly before the raid. Andit took me time to get the team ready without any advice given to the field commander, in yet Watkins-Defendant's Depo Page 104 withdraw the

Case 1:91-cv-01362-CFL

Document 195-4

Filed 07/27/2006

Page 35 of 36

105

1 Washingtonto pull together a quiet team of people to 2 be on site for security purposes because I felt that 3 there would be a potential conflict between the FBI and 4 the security force at RockyFlats were there to be any 5 unannouncedattempt to enter the complex. 6 7 Q I wonder if-A It would have been a very unusual situation.

8 We'venever had that before that I knowof, and I 9 thanked Thornburgh, the then Attorney General, for 10 letting me knowahead of time because we might have had 11 a serious confrontation. That was mybiggest concern. 12 13 Q Right. A Andno alert was given to the site. I can

14 assure you of that. 15 Q I wonder,sir, if you could look at Exhibit

16 1438 which I believe was your testimony before Congress 17 in October of 1989. 18 19 A Yes. Q And page 118 under the heading Senator

20 Bingaman,rather, was inquiring about the Department of 21 Justice criminal investigation. Do you see that? 22 A Uh-huh.

Watldns-Defendant's Depo

Page 105

Case 1:91-cv-01362-CFL

Document 195-4

Filed 07/27/2006

Page 36 of 36

119

1

Q Do you recall whether you read the search

2 warrant affidavit? 3 A I read -- I was briefed on it before the fact

4 by the Attorney General by his representative in his 5 office at the Justice Departmenta few days before they 6 went in. So I already had that. 7 Q Youhad had a briefing on the contents of the

8 affidavit? 9 A Right. 10 Q Do you recall whether at any time you

11 actually read the search warrant affidavit? 12 A I might have read portions of it that were

13 highlighted to me in briefings within the Departmentof 14 Energy by the various people involved, but I probably 15 did not read the entire report. 16 Q Do you recall whether either in your briefing

17 from the Departmentof Justice or otherwise you learned 18 that amongthe allegations madeby the Department of 19 Justice were allegations of alleged concealment or 20 misstatements by either DOE personnel or Rockwell 21 personnel? 22 MR. KOLAR: Objection to form and Watkins-Defendant's Depo Page 119