Mr. G. A. Maneatis, Senior Vice-PresidentFacilities DevelopmentPacific Gas and Electric Co.77 Beale StreetSan Francisco, California 94106

Mr. H. R. Denton, DirectorOffice of Nuclear Reactor RegulationU. S. Nuclear Regulatory CommissionWashington, D. C. 20555

Mr. R. H. Engelken, Regional AdministratorRegion V

U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission1450 Maria Lane, Suite 210Walnut Creek, California 94595

~Sub ect: Revised TES Personnel Assignments

Gentlemen:

AALEDYNEENGINEERINQ SERVtCES130 SECOND AVENUE

WALTHAM,MASSACHUSETTS 02254

(617) 890.3350 TWX (710) 324.7580

November 1, 19825511-186

With the addition of Construction guality Assurance and the furtherdevelopment of Phase II efforts, I have determined that a reassignmentof certain personnel identified in the Phase II Program Management Planis desirable.

Therefore, as of this date, Mr. Dean C. Stratouly replaces Mr. L. C.Noriega as Assistant Project Manager for SWEC efforts. This revisionaffects 4e3 of the Plan. Mr . Stratouly's resume is attached. He waspreviously the Review and Evaluation Team Leader for the SWEC PowerDivision activities.

Mr. Noriega remains with the Project as the Review and Evaluation TeamLeader for the Construction guality Assurance activity and for the SWECPower Division efforts, both reporting to Mr. Stratouly.

Very truly yours,

TELEDYNE ENGINEERING SERVICES

William E. CooperProject Manager - 5511

WEC/lh

Attachment

821 1 1 5057)9 821'1 06 jPDR ADOCK 05000275 (

' j' ANp MET4LLURG[$7$P PDR L'j

'

0

>f

8 TELEDYNEENGINEERlNQ SERVlCES

Messrs. Maneatis, Denton," Engelken5511-186November 1, 1982Page Two

cc: E. Denison (RLCA)R. F. Reedy (RFR)F. Sestak (SWEC)R. R. Fray (PGIIE)H. E. Schierling (NRC) (2)J

-r~-TELEDYNEEMQlMEERiNQSERVlCES

DEAN C. STRATOULYSenior Engineer

Professional Resume

Education

Massachusetts Maritime Academy, B.S. in Marine Engineering, 1952

Ex erience

Massachusetts Legislati'Ve Committee on Energy (since April 1977): Directorof Research - directed the efforts of committee staff and advised legislativepersonnel for all energy'related matters. TIiis work included the exploration,exploitation and development of energy sources~ and the siting of energyfacilities.General Dynamics Corp. /Electric Boat Division, Groton, CT, (1963 to 1977):

(a) Deputy Program Manager (1975-1977) - responsible for the constructionprogram of nuclear reactor plants in submarines. Directed engineering,procurement, manufacturing, installation, inspection and testing efforts toensure that the nuclear plant met the contract specifications and wasdelivered on schedule.

(b) Chief of Mechanical Systems and Components (1973-1975) - directed theefforts of engineers in the development of system design descriptions andfluid flow diagrams (PhIDs) of various reactor plant support systems of aland based prototype nuclear reactor plant. Work included plant and equipmentarrangements, specification and procurement of components, instrumentationand controls, piping, schedules, estimates, and contract administration.Also included was the preparation of the PSAR and FSAR. Technicalrequirements were to the ASME BICPVC and the various NRC regulatory guidesto the maximum extent possible and as supplemented by Naval Nuclear DesignStandards and Codes.

(c) Chief of Reactor Systems (1969-1973) - directed the engineering anddesign efforts for the development of a nUclear submarine reactor plant.Work included the preparation of fluid flow diagrams, construction drawings,power plant operating manuals, test procedures, equipment technical manuals,and specification and procurement of equipment.

(d) Senior Nuclear Project Engineer (1964-1969) - developed fluid flowdiagrams and system design descriptions. Directed design (drafting) effortsin the preparation of construction drawings of various reactor systems.

(e) Nuclear Test Engineer (1963-1964) - performed preliminary operation andperformance testing of reactor plant systems. Prepared test procedures andschedules. Determined the acceptability of data. Parti cipated in dock andsea trials.

F

7/82

'ELEDYNENQINEERING SERVICES

130 SECOND AVENUE

WA(.THAM.MASSACHUSETTS 02254

(61 7i 890 3350 TWX (710) 324 7580

October 29, 19825511-185

Mr. H. H. Brown, Esq.Kirkpatrick, Lockhart, Hill, Christopher, 8 Phillips1900 M Street, N.W. ..Washington, D.C. 20036

Subject: Response to H. H. Brown Letter of October 12, 1982

Dear Mr. Brown:

Dr. Cooper, as Project Manager for the DCNPP-IDVP, has reviewedyour request and asked that I respond as follows.

The referenced letter requests:

1. An explanation of the process and chronology of events bywhich Teledyne discussed with PGKE, Bechtel, Stone and

Webster, and/or others the subject of a Construction gualityAssurance (C(A) review of Diablo Canyon.

2. An explanation of the process and nature of negotiations and

discussions with PGLE, Bechtel, and/or others pursuant towhich Teledyne undertook to perform such review.

3. Copies of any correspondence Teledyne has had with PGEE,

Bechtel, Stone and Webster, and/or others concerning theforegoing, including particularly any materials related to thescope and content of the Construction gA Program.

4. Copies of Teledyne's contracts and subcontracts with PGICE

and/or others for the Construction gA pr'ogram.

5. An explanation of the relationship between Teledyne and Stoneand Webster regarding the CgA program, and copies of anycorrespondence and agreements with Stone and Webster.

Our responses are intended to be clarifications as intended by Mr.Denton's letter of September 29, 1982, to the extent that your requestspertain to information in the public domain. Mr. Denton's letter exemptscormnunicati ons solely with respect to financial and administrativeaspects. In the main, the responses are based upon our public statements

ENGINEERS AND METALLURGISTS

0 '

Nr. H. H. Brown,'.October 29', 1982Page 2

"lTELEDYNEENGINEERING SERVICES

made on September 1, October 7, and October 19-20, 1982 and the publiccorrespondence between the various parties. Before responding to thespecific questions, a clar ification with respect to the second paragraphof the reference letter may be helpful. That paragraph appears to placea different connotation on the term "adjunct", as in the title "AdjunctProgram for Evaluation of Construction guality Assurance", than wasintended. The quoted Webster definition of adjunct contained on thefirst text page of the CgA Program Plan is: "Something joined or addedto another thing but not essentially a part of it." The CgA program isthe "something", the Phase II IDVP is the "another thing", and the firstis not "essentially a part" of the second because the CgA program is notrequired by the NRC Letter to which Phase II responds. Instead, the CgAhas been volunteered by PGKE and the IDVP has "joined or added" thevolunteered technical work to Phase II for purposes of programmanagement. CgA is an adjunct, not a collateral program.

The following chronological presentation is intended to beresponsive to the first two of your requests, and covers the thirdbecause the public correspondence identified is already available toyou ~

1. TES'irst knowledge of CgA was a telecon from Mr. Maneatis toDr. Cooper the evening of August 30, 1982. Nr. Maneatis statedthat PGICE was considering volunteering the CgA program in themeeting with NRC to be held on September 1, 1982 and requestedthat Dr. Cooper visit with Mr. Maneatis on his arrival in SanFrancisco on the afternoon of August 31, 1982. There was alsoa brief discussion of the details discussed in the next item.

2. Dr. Cooper visited with Mr. Maneatis on the afternoon ofAugust 31, 1982. Nr. Maneatis gave Dr. Cooper a copy of theRegion V memo to Nr. Denton dated March 29, 1982 identifyingthe Region V concern, stated that the decision had been made tovolunteer a program in response to item 3 of the Region V memo,and stated the PGICE desire to place this program under IDVPManagement. Dr . Cooper responded that the IDVP would acceptthe=-management of the CgA program if PGEE would fully definethe scope they were volunteering, if the work could beconducted by Stone and Webster Engineering Corporation (SWEC)as an active and qualified IDVP participant, if TES and SWEC

found nothing disagreeable about the proposed scope, and ifthe CgA work could be conducted in accordance with the IDVPprogram management plan.

3. On the basis of their decision and the IDVP willingness tomanage the program, the CgA program was announced by Nr .Maneatis at the meeting with the NRC on September 1, 1982 (Tr.p. 10-11).

4. PG8E (Crane) advised NRC (Eisenhut) by letter dated September7, 1982 that PGIIE was proceeding to implement the proposalthat a CgA program be conducted as part of Phase II of theIDVP.

O.

~ Mr. H. H. Brown, WOctober 29, 1982Page 3

iTELEDYNEENGlNEERINQ SERVlCES

5. The next significant result from this process was TES

submittal (letter 5511-149 dated September 25, 1982) for PGIIE

approval and NRC information and coTments of a Program Planfor Construction Quality Assurance. The process used todevelop this submittal followed that implied by item 2:

a 0 DCP telecopied a Preliminary Program Description to TES

on September 2, 1982. TES reviewed this document, foundit to be reasonable, and hand carried a copy to SWEC fortheir review in preparation for a meeting the followingday.

"

6.

b. On the morning of September 8, 1982 Messrs. Maneatis and

Friend visited TES for the purpose of discussing the CQA

concept, and other administrative aspects. The term"adjunct" was developed during this discussion todistinguish the CQA aspects from those covered by the NRC

Phase II letter. On that afternoon, Messrs. Maneatis,Friend, Noriega and Cooper visited SWEC (Messrs. Wild,Kelley, Warren, Richardson, and Sestak) to review theproposed scope and integration into the IDVP program.Based upon this meeting, the IDVP agreed to accept theassignment, to prepare a program description adopting thePGICE-proposed scope, and to integrate the CQA with thePhase II program management plan.

c. The CQA Program plan was developed in parallel by TES and

by SWEC. The TES contribution primarily related to themanagement aspects of the CQA plan and became Sections1.0, 2.0 (partial), and 4.0 - 7.0 of the plan. The SWEC

contribution was developed in discussions with TES andwith DCP (Sec. 5a), was provided to DCP on September 17,1982 (TES letter 5511-131) as a Program Description whichbecame Sections 2.0 (partial) and 3.0 of the CQA plan. Inintegrating the two documents, word changes were made byTES in the SWEC contribution concerning the treatment ofPotential Findings to assure consistency with IDVP

procedures.

PGImE'pproved the TES proposal with comments by letter ofOctober 7, 1982, following verbal approval on October 5, 1982.'n

the latter date TES letter 5511-161 transmitted the CQA

Program Plan to all parties.

With respect to the fourth and fifth requests of the referencedletter, TES considers these to address financial and administrativeaspects outside of the scope of Mr. Denton's letter. However, it shouldbe noted that the relationships between PGEE and/or Bechtel and the IDVP,and the relationships between TES and SWEC, are not changed by theexistence of the CQA program.

C t'

Mr. H. H. Brown, ~.October 29', 1982~

™Page 4

'1ELEDYNEENQINEERINQ SERVICES

The addition of the C(A.program to the IDVP in no way changes theindependence of the IDVP.

Very truly yours,

TELEDYNE ENGINEERING SERVICES

Aldie E. Joh on, Jr., Vice PresidentInternal Services, Project 5511

AEJ:cjr

cc: W.E. CooperG.A. ManeatisR.R. FrayH.R. DentonR. EngelkenH. Schier ling5511 Document Control

0 a

'

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ IQQ c

- ~- - ~ ~ ~

e ~ e

~~

~ ~~ I ~

~g

I ~- ~~

+ ~

0 ~

~ I ~ ~

o. I

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

LR5LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLEEEL~ ~

s ~ ~

pggg'$~e~~

~ ~

~ ~

I I

~~

Lf '

~

S ~ ~ S ~ - ~ ~ ~

~ I ' ~0 ~

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

I ~ ~

~ ~ ~

~ ~

I ~ ~ ~ ~

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~~

~

P

t4 ~

I'