ML20147G730

Partially Deleted Ltr Forwarding Concerns Re Nine Mile Point Unit 2 Project.Principal Basis for Concerns in Connection W/ Matters Relates to Background,Assignments & Experience During 4 Yrs at Shoreham

ML20147G730
Person / Time
Site:	Nine Mile Point, 05000000, Shoreham
Issue date:	01/26/1985
From:	Dick W AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED
To:	NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
Shared Package
ML20147G281	List: ML20147G278 ML20147G573 ML20147G623 ML20147G697 ML20147G730 ML20147G749 ML20147G909 ML20147G936 ML20147G962
References
FOIA-88-56 NUDOCS 8803080304
Download: ML20147G730 (2)

Text

_ -. .

l

~

~

1 1

l

e- l I '

l Regional Director .

US NRC. Region 1 l

~

l 631 Park Avenue anuar 1 1

, King of Prussia. PA 19406 r-i r

Reference:

Nine Mile Point No.2 Researches in connection with my current circumstances as a former employee of Stone & Webster Engineering Corporation lead me to notify you of matters relating to the referenced project. These matt.ers are summarized on Attachment 1.

The principal basis for my concerns in connection with these matters relates to my background, assignments and experience during four years at the Shoreham Nuclear Power Station. A sum:r.ary of my assignments at Shoreham is provided by Attachment

2. Of particular note, the follow-up to readiness assessment at Shoreham (83-02) contributed significantly to my methods and plans while at Nine Mile 2.

These matters are brought to your attention in accordance with 10 CTR 21.2 as suspected failure to comply and related potentially motivating oc.currences. This notification is as soon as of f actively possible af ter reviewing the relevance of these matters to the Connission and after pursuit through other j prescribed channels as indicated by Attachments 3 and 4.

1 If you have further questions please advise.

Very Truly Yours.

' s^

- y ,p g :-

(don Diclt - - ' ~=

) -G

/

i

~

9903000304 FOIA 880303 PDR PDR I PALAST86-56 Attachment 1: Matters Relating to Nine Mile Point No.2.

Attachment 2: Sunnary of Personal Assig nts at reham. ,

Attache:ent 3: Letter to J.G. Haehl fro l

_ Attachment 4: Letter to F.W. Reis f rom W.G. Dick.

. . _ . . ., _ . . _ . , , _ - __ . , _ . - ._-.__,m--

F

\

f ATTACHMENT 1: ' CONCERNS RELATING TO THE NINE MILE POINT NO.2 PROJECT j' 1. Major milestone schedules were drawn and used during 1984 with significant known omissions, grossly unrealistic assumptions, ignoring industry practice and highly relevant recent experiences at Shoreham.

2. These milestone schedules were used to plan and track work, creating management demands for excessive overtime, compounding -

l poor work practices, procedural and quality omissions, excessive quality rejections, personnel f atique, and excessive premium costs.

3. The milestone schedules formed a basis for cash flow projections, projec6 co.c., and other project data directly relevanc :o the solicitation of funding.

! 4. The solicitation of funding on the basis of information known to omit significant work and with unrealistic assumptions, however i atypical, is a potential inf ringement of the security laws, j specifically Rule 10b-5.

, 5. These unrealistic assumptions, poor practices, quality dif ficulties,  !

i were brought to management attention on several occasions by several individuals in verbal and written form repeatedly without ef f ective result.

T l 6. Some highly experienced empicyees who sought to identify these diffi 91 ties and to make alternative recommendations were discredited and criticized and on May 3,1984, immediately af ter

- raising these concerns, the manager of electrical construction I was abruptly fired.

i

' 7. The dismissal-of an employee who attempts to identify concerns l that af f ect quality and saf ety is contrary to federal regulations and constitutes a discriminatory practice as described in 10 CFR 50.7.

l 8. Documented details in existance at that time and evolving in subsequent months substantiate these concerns. Additionally, significant and potentially disruptive management changes have taken place and schedules have been further manipulated or

. "enhanced" to avoid changes to the overall and dates essential to continued project funding at existing investment ratings.

9. Independent subsequent assessments by other agencies have documented the omission of quality documentation steps essential to timely project completion.

6 4

w 1

.m,,

.__.,_.,,.,.r. _ - , . , _ . , , . .,_ _ _ , _ - _ _ _ _ _. __ , , . . , , , - _