December 10, 2025, Planning Board Special Meeting - WEHI Transcript

11 of 55 sheets Page 41 to 44 of 144 01/14/2026 10:36:25 AM 41 you mean by this next sentence. "We agree that that1 would be an extreme event which may justify a lower2 Factor of Safety upon review of relevant standards."3 Yes, I think, as I testified at the last meeting,4 A. there is nothing, there is nothing in the data that has5 been provided that indicates that this event could6 actually occur. But for other extreme events, such as a7 seismic case, and this would be equivalent to a, what's8 called a sudden drawdown for a dam, those safety factors9 in the order of 1.1 and 1.2 are usually considered10 acceptable.11 What does it mean by saying, when you said, "We12 Q. agree." What were you agreeing with?13 I'm sorry, we agreed what?14 A. It says, "We agree that that would be an extreme15 Q. event which may justify a lower Factor of Safety."16 Yeah, we both agreed that the incident, that the17 A. loading case that I was talking about is an unlikely18 event.19 Where did you reach this agreement?20 Q. On the phone conversation.21 A. Where my expert was excluded?22 Q. Well, I --23 A. "Yes" or "no"?24 Q. Yes. I didn't intentionally exclude him.25 A. 42 You Didn't bother to call him, right?1 Q. You know where Princeton Hydro is, don't you?2 Yes, I do.3 A. Okay.4 Q. So you expressed an agreement on a point of5 substance in terms of the Factor of Safety with the6 applicants engineer in a private conversation in which7 my engineer was not part of it, is that correct?8 That's correct.9 A. Thank you.10 Q. And this conversation occurred prior to your11 December 3 testimony, isn't that correct?12 Correct.13 A. And when I cross examined you on these issues on14 Q. December 3 I didn't know about these private discussions15 at that time because you only disclosed it tonight,16 correct?17 Well, I gave you, I think, the previous18 A. conversations that were entered as an exhibit are19 included in that chain.20 Exhibit O-36 was a December 1 and December 221 Q. e-mail. I am referring to the November 14 e-mail which22 was not?23 Oh, okay. If you're referring to November 14,24 A. no.25 43 So when I cross-examined you on some of these1 Q. very subjects on December 3, I didn't know your opinion2 was the product of a private discussion with Langan and3 Anderson, did I?4 That was my opinion. It wasn't Langan's opinion.5 A. You said, "We agree with you."6 Q. Oh, I said a safety

now your opinion2 was the product of a private discussion with Langan and3 Anderson, did I?4 That was my opinion. It wasn't Langan's opinion.5 A. You said, "We agree with you."6 Q. Oh, I said a safety factor of 1.2 would be7 A. adequate and we agreed.8 So in your independent evaluation of my clients9 Q. expert report and their clients expert report you10 reached an agreement, an understanding on a point of11 substance when one side was not party to the discussion12 and you allowed me to cross-examine you without13 disclosing you had those meetings, didn't you?14 I think before the last cross-examination I had15 A. given you those papers that summarized the discussion in16 it.17 You had given me Exhibit O-36, the December 1 and18 Q. December 2 e-mails. You didn't give anything else to me19 on that occasion, did you?20 Okay. I thought the whole chain was attached.21 A. No, it was not.22 Q. I'm sorry, that's my mistake.23 A. So when I cross-examined you on these very24 Q. subjects I could not have known that you had reached an25 44 agreement with Langan on this very point, could I?1 You couldn't, no.2 A. I note that these e-mails begin November 13,3 Q. after your November 10 testimony. From the time you did4 your inspection -- strike that.5 When was your visual inspection of the site? If6 you don't remember the exact date, approximately?7 I don't remember the exact date.8 A. Do you remember approximately when you went?9 Q. Must have been a couple weeks before the first10 A. meeting. It -- I don't know if I have it in my report,11 whether I recorded the date. We visited the site, the12 area of the site in question October 2, 2025, along with13 Paul W. Anderson, PE, the applicants site engineer, to14 evaluate the conditions along the ridge in relation to15 the descriptions contained in the applicants and the16 objectors reports.17 Now, what you didn't say in that report was that18 Q. you had these private discussions, did you? But you19 couldn't have because they occurred afterwards.20 No, I said we were there with Mr. Anderson.21 A. What's the date of your report?22 Q. October 28.23 A. But you never supplemented your report to24 Q. identify your later discussions with Anderson and25