ML20050C504
| ML20050C504 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Allens Creek File:Houston Lighting and Power Company icon.png |
| Issue date: | 03/26/1982 |
| From: | Sas L EBASCO SERVICES, INC., HOUSTON LIGHTING & POWER CO. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20050C500 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8204080573 | |
| Download: ML20050C504 (24) | |
Text
- .
CCtMETED 1
.n r -i "1 1 2
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA' NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 3
BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD 4
'I" E
5 HOUSTON LIGHTING & POWER COMPANY 5
Docket No. 50-466 6
g (Allens Creek Nuclear Generating 5
7 Station, Unit No. 1)
S 8
TESTIMONY OF LOUIS J. SAS ON BEHALF OF HOUSTON LIGHTING & POWER COMPANY 9
ON TEXPIRG ADDITIONAL CONTENTION 31 10 Q.
Please state your name and place of employment.
11 A.
My name is Louis J.
Sas.
I am employed by Ebasco 13 Services, Inc. as Vice President, Engineering.
My 14 business address is 2 World Trade Center, New York, New 15 York.
16 17 Q.
Mr. Sas please describe your professional experience.
18 and educational background.
19 20 A.
My professional experience and educational background are set forth on Exhibit LJR-1.
21 22 23 24 t-l 8204000573 B20326 PDR ADOCK 05000466 T
e L
1 2
Q.
What is the purpose of your testimony?
3 A.
The purpose of this testimony is to address Intervenor 4
Doherty's Renewed Motion for Additional Evidence on 5
TexPirg Additional Contention 31, as granted by the 6
Board.
Mr. Doherty c.leges that certain issues he has 7
discovered in the document entitled " Design Review of Brown & Root Engineering Work for the South Texas 9
Project" (Ma3 1981) prepared by the Quadrex Corporation 10
("Quadrex Report /B&R") are important and can be related 11 to the design of Allens Creek by Ebasco.
My tectimony 12 will address these itemized allegations (Doherty issues 13 A-0) and describe measures which Ebasco takes to avoid 14 difficulties of this type.
15 16 Q.
Mr. Sas, are you familiar with the Quadrex Report /B&R 17 and specifically Tart 3 of the Report (Generic Findings) 18 from which Mr. Doherty obtained his issues (A) through 19 (0) referenced in the Board's order of January 28, 20 1982?
l 21 A.
I have reviewed Volc.e 1 of the Report with an eye 22 toward responding to the generic issues raised by Mr.
23 24 l.
s' 1
2 Doherty as they might relate to Ebasco engineering 3
Practices.
4 Q-In Y ur Pinion, does the Quadrex Report /B&R raise any 5
issue as to whether Ebasco can properly engineer the Allens Creek Project?
8 A.
No, it does not.
That report deals specifically with' 9
Brown & Root.
Even if the findings of that report are 10 assumed to be valid, Ebasco has a mature engineering 11 organizaticn designed to avoid the problems reflected 12 in the Quadrex Report /B&R.
In approximately 20 years 13 of designing nuclear plants, we have gained a vast 14 amount of experience.
This fact was confirmed by the 15 Quadrex Corporation's review of Ebasco which is referenced 16 in Mr. Goldberg's testimony and which concluded that 17 Ebasco medts or exceeds current industry practice.
18 19 Q.
Mr. Sas, do you have a general statement regarding 20 Mr. Doherty's alleged issues before you reply speci-fically to each issue?
21 22 23 24 l..
\\
1 2
A.
Yes, I would like to point out several pertinent items i
3 which are general in nature and apply to most of Mr.
4 Doherty's alleged issues.
5 First of all - Ebasco's nuclear plant activities are 6
covered in Ebasco's Quality Assurance Topical Report 7
ETR 1001 which has been approved by the NRC to be in 8
compliance with 10 CFR 50 Appendix B - Quality Assurance 9
requirements.
In assembling a QA Manual for each of 10 our projects, we deviate from ETR-1001 only when neces-11 sary to be consistent with specific client QA requirements.
12 The client and the NRC have been auditing us against 13 the QA manual and we have a good record of following 14 our commitments.
15 16 Second - the NRC recently conducted an audit of Ebasco 17 to assess the effectiveness of Ebasco's system for 18 design verification by in-depth design reviews of 19 specific safety related systems on two active projects.
20 The NRC in their letter of February 17, 1982 notified us of the results which are as follows:
Violations -
21 None; Non-conformances - None; Unresolved Items - None.
22 A letter from the NRC setting forth these findings is 23 attached as Exhibit LJS-2.
24 '
4 e*
l e,
l 1
2 Third - In addition I would like to point out that the 3
ASME surveys our aperation at least every three years 4
in granting us N Certification as a design organization and N Stamps at our construction site.
We have been 5
found to be in acceptable Compliance with ASME require-ments and we presently hol'd N Certification from the ASME.
8 9
Fourth - Mr. Goldberg has indicated that Quadrex con-10 ducted an engineering review of Ebasco as well as Brown 11 and Root.
Following this review, Quadrex found that 12 Ebasco meets or exceeds normal industry practice.
13 14 Q.
Turning to Mr. Doherty's alleged Quadrex Report issues 15 A-0, please provide Ebasco's response to each issue.
16 17 A.
Issues A & B - Systems Integration Overview and Inter-18 face Among Engineering Disciplines:
19 20 Issues L and B will be addressed together because the items of concern (i.e. systems integration and overview 21 function, interface relationship among engineering 22 disciplines and systems engineering functions) are all 23 integral parts of the systems engineering process. ___
c 1
2 Systems engineering can be described as the integration 3
of input of specialized engineering disciplines in developing a final plant design.
System integration is 4
"9 "*"
"9 5
deals with it in the following manner:
7 Ebasco Topical Report (ETR)-1001 Section QA-I-2 des-cribes the functional organization and responsibilities 9
within Ebasco.
This organization assures that project 10 disciplines effectively interface with each other.
11 Further, Ebasco as a company has designed and constructed 12 many other nuclear power plants, many of which are BWRs 13 as described in PSAR Chapter 1.
The benefits of this 14 experience are available to, and are reflected in, the 15 ACNGS project team.
16 17 The ACNGS Quality Assurance (QA) Program contains 18 specific measures intended to assure the proper exchange 19 of information both within and between interfacing 20 disciplines.
This process, described in the QA Program Manual Section QA-I-4, affords disciplines the opportun-21 ity to review, comment and approve design documents 22 generated by others which can affect their work.
24..
w c
1 2
The ACNGS project has taken a further step to assure 3
go d systems engineering in developing System Design 4
Descriptions (SDD) for each "eystem" in the plant (system not being defined in the classical sense, but 5
in a broader way to encompass any major portion of the 6
plant as well as systems).
The SDD format includes functions and design requirements, design description, system limitations, operation, casualty events and 9
recovery procedures, and maintenance.
Consequently, 10 the SDD contains all the design criteria for that 11 system, and includes a list of interfaces with other 12 systems.
System interfaces overlap each other since 13 they are included in the SDD for the interfacing system 14 as well.
15 16 At Allens Creek and other Ebasco projects, a Lead 17 Systems Engineer is assigned to the project engineering 18 team.
The Lead System Engineer is responsible for 19 reviewing and approving all SDDs.
?
20 l
Thus, the use of SDDs provides an extra layer of assur-21 l
22 ance that the plant systems are indeed properly integrated.
.23 l
24 i
l i i
.~'
1 2
~ Issue C - Input Data Review:
3 VendorsuppliedinputdataisrevieweddfEbascofor 4
reas nableness, interface with Ebasco design, and 5
mpleteness per contract requirements.
Before a 6
vendor is approved to provide safety-related services /
7 components, his QA/QC program is audited and approved by Ebasco/HL&P against 10CFR50 Appendix B requirements.
9 This audit assures Ebasco/HL&P that the vendor's QA/QC 10 program will satisfy all applicable NRC requirements 11 (PSAR Sections 17,.1.3A and 4A,.ETR-1001 Sections QA-I-5 12 and QA-II-9).
Since certified vendor reports are 13 covered by this approved QA/QC program, re-verification 14 by Ebasco/HL&P is not required nor is it necessary.
15 16 Input data generated within Ebasco is verified by the 17 initiating department prior to its release for use in 18 accordance with existing corporate design control 19 procedures described in PSAR Sectio" 17.1.3A and 20 ETR-1001 Section QA-I-4.
Implementation by Ebasco of 21 this program has been audited by HL&P in accordance with HL&P's QA procedures.
22 23 24 i,
e 1
2 Issue D - Calculational Errors:
3 Safety-related design calculations performed by Ebasco 4
are prepared and independently checked or verified by 5
individuals competent in the subject activity (PSAR 6
Section 17.1.3A, ETR-1001 Sections QA-I-4 and QA-II-1).
This independent verification assures that calculational errors will be eliminated prior to the release of the 9
calculation.
10 11 Implementation of this program by Ebasco is audited by 1
HL&P in accordance with HL&P QA procedures.
13 14 Issue E - Vendor Surveillance:
15 16 As described in item C, verification and checking of 4
17 the work done by major contractors and suppliers (includ-18 ing vendor reports) is done by the subcontractor / supplier 19 originating the work.
Contracts for safety-related work 20 are given only to qualified companies which have demon-strated competence and experience in their field of 21 endeavor and have an approved Quality Assurance Program 22 l
(QAP) in operation.
The QAP is reviewed and approved 23 I
by HL&P/Ebasco during the vendor selection process, and
_g_
j j
1 2
compliance with the QAP during performance of the work 3
is checked through periodic audits of the subcontractor /
SUPP ier by HL&P and/or Ebasco.
l 4
5 Issue F - Plant Modes and Conditions:
7 ACNGS safety-related systems and components are derigned 8
to accommodate the single failure of safety-related 9
components following an initiating event, the various 10 plant conditions of design, and plant process conditions 11 as described in PSAR Chapter 3 and 10 CFR 50 Appendix A.
12 Ebasco satisfies these commitments via the design 13 controlprocessdescribedinPSkRChapter17Section 14 17.1.3A and Ebasco Topical Report (ETR)-1001 Sections 15 QA-I-4 and QA-II-1.
The plant operating modes and 16 conditions are stated in the System Design Description 17 documents.
All project procurement and design documents, 18 including the PSAR, are revised as necessary in accordance 19 with the above mentioned Quality Assurance Procedures.
20 Conformance to these procedures is audited by HL&P in 21 a cordance with HL&P QA procedures.
22 23 24
- I
1 2
Issue G - Safety-Related Classification:
3 4
The procedure for classification of design items as safety-related is described in PSAR Appendix 0 Item 5
I.F.1 and in ETR-1001 Section QA-I-4.
Ebasco's role in 6
this process is summarized below.
7 8
Leasco Project Engineering is responsible for prepara-9 tion and maintenance of the list of drawings and specifi-10 cations which includes designation of an item as safety-11 related.
The Project Engineer is specifically required 12 to consult with the Project Licensing Engineer with 13 regard to the safety and seismic classification of 14 design items, and the list cannot be issued without the 15 approval signature of the Project Licensing Engineer in 16 this regard.
The Project Licensing Engineer and his 17 staff check the proposed classifications against relevant 18 guidance such as PSAR Section 3.2 commitments and 19 Regulatory Guides 1.26 and 1.29 in making this determina-20 tion.
Once approved within Ebasco, this list is subject 21 to review and comment by HL&P.
Ebasco updates this l
list semiannually, implementing appropriate design 22 review Controls found in PSAh Section 17.1.3A and ETR-1001 Section QA-I-4.
l 1
2 Issue H - NRC Requirements:
3 4
First, L.a ACNGS design has been reviewed by the NRC Staff against virtually all of the latest licensing 5
criteria.
This is obvious by virtue of the fact that 6
ACNGS is still active in the construction permit phase 1
of the licensing process.
There have been two SER Supplements issued for ACNGS this year giving favorable 9
evaluation of compliance with licensing criteria, 10 including both TMI and non-TMI concerns.
11 12 Second, there is a process in place (described in PSAR 13 Appendix 0, Item I.C.5) to evaluate design, operating 14 and construction experience.
This same process is used 15 to evaluate significant new licensing criteria as well, 16 as discussed in the referenced SAR Section.
17 18 Issue I - Failure Modes and Effects Analysis:
19 20 This issue is addressed in my discussion of Issues F 21 and J.
22 23 24
1 2
Issue J - Single Failure Criterion:
3 4
The single failure criterion is a well recognized criterion for safety-related systems.
It is considered 5
by the originating disciplines during the design process 6
and is an important aspect of our Licensing Group's review of a system as described in Isstles K & L.
9 The ccLformance to the single failure criterion is 10 demonstrated in the Failure Modes and Effects Analyses 11 (FMEA) in the SAR and is considered in licensing review of project safety-related documents (Flow Diagrams, 13 Specifications, System Design Descriptions, Logic 14 Diagrams, etc.).
15 16 As described in Issue N, HL&P has committed to perform 17 a Reliability Analysis Program study of the ACNGS 18 design per PSAR Appel. dix 0, Item II.B.8.1.
This study 19 will provide an added layer of design review to assure 20 that the single failure criterion has been adequately 21 considered in the design.
22 23 24 l.
l 2
Issue K - Implementation of Safety Analysis Commitments:
3 4
Imp?.ementation of PSAR commitments in the design is a re gnized area of special _mportance at Ebasco and is 5
covered by PSAR Sections 17.1.3A and 6A and ETR-1001 Sections QA-I-2 and QA-I-4.
These procedures require the following:
8 9
1.
The Lead Discipline Engineers (LDEs), wno are 10 responsible for the design, also participate with 11 the Project Licensing Engineer (PLE) in the prepara-12 tion and maintenance of the PSAR.
They, in fact, 13 have formal approval / disapproval rights over SAR 14 sections for which they are responsible.
Since 15 the LDEs are thus familiar with the SAR, they 16 routinely factor SAR commitments into their~ design 17 work in accordance with approved corporate pro-18 cedures.
(See Issue L).
19 2.
Verification that SAR commitments are reflected in 20 21 the design is the formal responsibility of the PLE.-
When the PLE reviews the Document Review 22 List (discussed in Issue G), he identifies those 24 9 i
)
s 1
2 design documents which are affected by the SAR.
3 These documents must then be sent to the PLE prior 4
to formal issuance so that he or his staff can ascertain that the proper SAR commitments are g
reflected in the design work.
The document may not be issued until the PLE has approved it.
The PLE's review is documented both in the licensing 8
files and in the originating disciplines design 9
record files.
Changes to approved design documents, 10 if they affect safety-design bases, require formal 11 reissuance with associated design review per the 12 approved procedures listed above.
13 14 3.
Ebasco provides an approved company procedure 15 docum2nted under PSAR Section 17.1.3A and ETR-1001 16 Sections QA-I-1, QA-I-4 and QA-II-l for the genera-j 17 tion and processing of Field Changes Requests (FCRs).
18 This procedure provides field-home office interface 19 to assure that significant revisions to controlled 20 documents, whether these revisions are initiated 21 in the field or in the home office, are promptly identified and approved by the appropriate disci-22 plines.
Design controls identified above and in 3
24 I..
- L-c
r 1
2 Issue K are then utilized to revise all applicable 3
project documents.
4 Is. sue L - Licensing Input:
5 6
As discussed in Issue K, the Nuclear Licensing Group is integral to the design review process at Ebasco.
Since they formally review safety-related design documents, 9
this assures consistency in the understanding and 10 implementation of licensing requirements.
11 12 The Licensing Group's role in the design review process 13
,also enables it to update the SAR, for which it is 14 responsible.
If licensing notes an inconsistency of 15 safety importance between the design. document and SAR, 16 the inconsistency must be resolved prior to approval of 17 the document.
18 19 Issue M - Consistency in Design Bases:
20 21 Ebasco utilizes documented safety-related systems, structures and component design bases.
These bases are 22 established and documented in accordance with PSAR Section 17.1.3A and 4A and ETR-1001 Sections QA-I-4 and 1
~2 QA-II-1 and QA-II-4.
These design bases are further 3
identified and maintained in various ACNGS specific 4
control documents (e.g. PSAR, departmental Design 5
Manuals, System Design Descriptions, Civil Design Criteria, Procurement Specifications, and Design Drawings) 6 in accordance with the above approved procedures.
7 8
Conformance to these procedures is audited by HL&P in 9
accordance with HL&P QA procedures.
10 11 Issue N - Equipment Specifications:
12 13 Specific reliability values normally are not specified 14 nor are they required to be specified.
The only excep-15 tion to this is the specification for the safety-related 16 Diesel-Generators which includes acceptance criteria i
17 for starting reliability in order to satisfy IEEE-387 18 and applicable NRC guidelines.
19 20 Ebasco purchases safety-related equipment by utilizing 21 specifications which detail ACNGS design bases, perfor-22 mance requirements and environmental qualification e nditions.
These specifications are controlled docu-23 ments, prepared and maintained in accordance with PSAR 4
e
t-l 1-2 Sections 17.1.3A and 4A and ETR-1001 Sections QA-I-4 3
and QA-II-4.
4 In addition, the Applicant has committed to address 5
NUREG-0718 Item I.C.5 " Procedures for Feedback of 6
Operating, Design and Construction Experience" as described in PSAR Appendix 0.
Under this program, 8
components which prove themselves to be unreliable in 9
operation at other operating facilities will be identi-
)
10 fied so that corrective me'asures can be implemented.
I 11 HL&P has committed to perform a Reliability Analysis 12 Program study of the ACNGS design per PSAR Appendix 0, 13 Item II.B.8.1.
This study will provide an added layer 14 of design review to assure that the single failure 15 criterion has been adequately considered in the design.
16 17 Conformance to these procedures is audited by HL&P in 18 accordance with HL&P QA procedur(2.
19 20 Issue 0 - Design Verification:
21 Approved design data is required for all Ebasco specifica-22 tions released for engineering, material procurement 23 and fabrication.
This data is the latest, approved for.
y,,.
n,,
1 use at the time the specification is issued.
Revisions to this data are possible and approved project procedures exist to allow for notification, evaluation and correc-4 tion of any discrepancies.
5 6
Prnliminary design data and conservative estimates are 7
utilized in the design and construction of variou.s 8
structures.
However, prior to fuel load and operation, 9
these assumptions are verified to assure that they are 10 indeed conservative and that the design is adequate.
11 12 Reliance on engineering assumptions is formally documented 13 and controlled via conformance with PSAR Sections 17.1.3A 14 and 6A and ETR-1001 Sections QA-I-4 and QA-II-2.
15 16 Furthermore, when design loadings are estimated, they 17 are f rmally documented so that they are retrievable.
When final design loadings are available they are 8
reviewed against the estimates to assure that the estimates have not been exceeded.
If these estimates 20 are exceeded the design will be re-analyzed and modified, 21 as necessary to assure its adequacy.
22 l
\\
23 24 l - -
~
~
EXHIBIT LJS-1 L J SAS Vice President-Engineering EXPERIENCE SLNMARY Registereo Prcfessional Engineer with over 20 years experience in engineering and aaministration in nuclear and fossil power generation and industrial projects.
Accountable to the Senior Vice President-Engineering and Construction for planning, directing and coordinating the activities of the New York, Long Island and New Jersey Engineering Departments so as to ensure.
the technical adequacy of the oepartment work and that client requirements are satisfied in a timely, efficient and economical manner.
Responsible for preparation and keeping up-to-date all standard specifications and design guices for engineering and design departments within Ebasco, including regional, branch and affiliate offices.
As Chief Engineer, accountable to the Vice President-Engineering for the technical adequacy as. well as for compliance with schedule and budget of mechanical-nuclear engineering and design portion of projects assigned to New York, Long Island and New Jersey Office.
Responsibilities, as Assistant Chief Engineer included identification, oevelopment ano implementation of training programs at all levels of cepartmental personnel.
Assisted Chief Mechanical-Nuclear Engineer in the oevelopment of departmental policies, procedures and standards and operating Ducget.
As Supervisor, responsibilities included directing the Mechanical-Nuclear Engineering portion of engineering, cesign, preparation of studies, PSAR, FSAR, flow ciagrams anc general arrangements of systems, structures, and equipment.
Responsible for final approval of specifications, purchase recommenoations, certification of design specifications and drawings.
Testifieo at ACRS ano ASLB puolic hearings.
Made technical and r3 sign presentations at meetings with NRC and client personnel.
Developed piping penetration cesign for Mark III, BWR containment.
Responsibilities as Lead Mechanical-Nuclear Engineer on Houston Lighting &
Power Company's two 1200 MWe BWR Allens Creek Nuclear Power Generating Station incluceo initiation of aesign concepts, manpower forecast, direction and coorcination of activities of Mechanical-Nuclear Engineers assigned to the project inclucing cesign personnel througn the Supervising Designer, coordination of activities of Mechanical-Nuclear Engineers with the activities of other engineering cisciplires and service grotos, cortpletion and review of PSAR sections, engineering specifications, design calculations, optimization of systems, bla eveluations, purchase recommendations, design drawings incluaing plant building arrangements, general arrangements and flow diagrams; all consistent with project schedW 's, NRC and other regulator / agency requirements, coae requirements and et.ractual obligations.
. L J SAS EXPERIENCE SLMMAfkY (Cont'd)
Responsibilities as Senior Engineer included assisting Lead Mechanical Engineer, aeveloping design criteria and flow diagrams consistent with project scope documents, contracts God PSARs, cocrdinating work of Mechanical-Nuclear Engineers with that of engineers of other disciplines, writing specifications, making bio analyses, purchase recommendations, attending NRC meetings and visiting venaar facilities.
Responsible for pipe fabrication contract and valves. ' Designea piping and fuel transfer tube penetrations for containment for St. Lucie 890 MWe PWR Nuclear Plant.
As Job Engineer at Parsons Jurden Corp. responsibilities included representing the Piping Department on assigned projects, initiation of design concepts, i
manpower forecasts, buCg3t, Cooraination of work with other disciplines and construction, the supervision ano direction of five graduate engineers and approximately 20 cesigners ana draftsmen engaged in engineering, designing,
- crafting, material
- takeoff, specification writing, bid evaluation and et,uipment purcnase recommendation for tanks, pumps, valves, specialty items, compressors, thickeners, flotation cells, filters, etc.
Designea cross.-country pipelines carrying waster, concentrates and tallings and special orifice stations to dissipate available static head in pipeline.
Design accition of industrial waste treatment system on the following projects:
10,000 TPO-Copper Beneficiation Plant Cerro Corporation Rio Blanco Project, Rio Blanco, Chile, SA and Aluminum Reduction Plant, Potlines 4 ana 5 - Anaconda Aluminum Company, Columbia F* alls, Montana.
As Assistant Job Engineer, responsible for systems design. and specification of equipment, bid evaluation ana purchase recommendation for water storage and treatment systems, conpressed air systems, reagents, sartpling systems, tanks, pumps, compressors piping and valves.
Layed out equipment and made plant arrangements of water pur, ping stations. Made numerous trips to construction site to coorcinate design and construction and altered design to suit availaole construction materials on the f allowing project: 9000 TPD - Copper, Lead, Zinc, Silver, Pyrate Beneficiation Plant - Klod Creek Project, Texas Gulf Sulphur Company, Timmins, Ontario, Canaca.
At Consolicated Eaison Ccnpany of New York, responsibilities included working on aesign anc layout of piping, equipment instrumentation ano piping supports for Coal, 011 and Gas fireo Steam Electric Generation Stations in the New York City area.
Mace conputer analysis of piping system flexibility.
Had extensive field work experience in making modifications to and expansion of existing facilities.
l O I
r,
, L J SAS
'dPRESENTATIVE EXPERIENCE Client Project Size Fuel Position Louisiana Power & Light Ninemile Point 66 MW,100 MW, Fossil Assistant Company Unit Nos.1, 2, 3 125 MW Chief Houston Lighting & Power Limestone Project 750 MW Lignite Fossil Assistant Company Unit No. 2 Units Chief Florida Power & Light St. Lucie 890 MWe Nuclear Assistant Company Unit Nos.1 & 2 Chief Houston Lighting & Power Allens Creek 1200 MWe Nuclear Assistant Company Unit No.1 Chief Louisiana Power & Light Waterford 1165 MWe Nuclear Assistant Company Unit NO. 3 Chief Ebasco Standardization BWR & PWR 1200 MWe Nuclear Assistant Program Chief Ebasco Stanoard Reference Fossil Assistant Plants Chief Detroit Eoison Company Fermi Unit 3 1200 MWe Nuclear Supervisor Houston Lighting & Power Allens Creek 1200 MWe ea.
Nuclear Supervisor Company Unit Nos.1 & 2 Louisiana Power & Light waterforo 1165 MWe M; clear Supervisor Company Unit No. 3 EMPLOYMENT HISTORY Ebasco Services Incorporated, New York, N Y; 1969 - Present o
Vice President,1981 - Present a
Chief Engineer, 1978-1981 o
Assistant Chief Engineer, 1976-1978 o
Supervising Engirner, 1973-1976 o
Principal Engineer, 1972-1973 o
Senior Engineer, 1969 1972 Parson-Jurden Corporation, New York, N Y; 196* ' 59 e
Engineer, 1967-1969 o
Senior Designer, 1965-1967
, L J SAS EWLOYENT HISTORY (Cont'd)
Consolidated Edison Company of New York, N Y; 1957-1965 o
Senior Designer, 1963-1965 o
Designer, 1960-1963 o
Draftsman, 1957-1960 EDUCATION Cooper Union School of Engineering - BS - Engineering - 1969 Continuing Education Courses in Reliability,, Seismic Analysis, Finance, Decision Making anc Economics REGISTRATIONS Professional Engineer New York, New Jersey, Florida, Iowa, Louisiana,
- Micnigan, Minnesota,
- NCEE, North Carolina,
- Texas, Virginia, Washington PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) - Member National Society of Professional Engineers New Jersey Society of Professional Engineers ANSI 631.1
" Power Piping" Code Committee Member EEI/ Prime Movern A/E Comittee ASE Pressure Vessel & Piping High Pressure Technology Comittee ASME B4PV Coce Section I Piping Sub-Group Member Steam Generator Owner's Group-A/E Technical Advisory Committee Engineering Technology Aavisory Committee to Board of Directors-NJ Institute of Tech Tau Beta Pi-Engineering Honor Society TECHNICAL PAPERS "To Convert or Not to Convert" - Published in Energy Business, Winter,1980 -
an Ebasco Publication.
" Alternative Choices f or Existing 011 and Gas Fired Units" - Presented at the.
Fiftieth Ebasco Annual Executive Conference.
1 1
2 Q.
What are your conclusions?
3 A.
The design process at Allens Creek incorporates fea-4 tures which assure the type of issues alleged by Mr.
5 Doherty do not occur on Allens Creek.
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 9
20 21 22 23 24