ML20151N135

Discusses Request for Allegation Presented to NRC by Gap in Oct 1985

ML20151N135
Person / Time
Issue date:	11/16/1987
From:	Stello V NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO)
To:	Hayes B NRC OFFICE OF INVESTIGATIONS (OI)
Shared Package
ML20151N092	List: ML20151N088 ML20151N098 ML20151N107 ML20151N118 ML20151N127 ML20151N135
References
FOIA-87-836, REF-QA-99900403 NUDOCS 8808080122
Download: ML20151N135 (21)

Text

_

1

/.

^ . t' e

e .F c.Y

- / 1 L

/

tes

, nj ..

J f

. " . !7  !". 2 U ' .

NOV t 4 W Request No. NRR-87-02

, . , . Allegation ho. IE-85-A 0023 HIBOR$1DUF, OR: Ben B. Hayes, Director i

Office of Investigatter.s ops' 01 RI FRZ: Victor Stello, Jr. _ OIM l Executive Director fer Operations 0' Mi _ ____

~~

y

SUBJECT:

REQUEST FOR INVEST! GAT!Oh g , f-FOIA /

General Electric (NEBO) 99900403

~ EM . m j M nsee/Ver. dor / Applicant Docket No. "" "-

San Jose. California Facility or Site Location Thomas E. Murley NOV 16137 Office Director Date A. Request During the NRC review of alle Acccuntability Project (GAF) in gatiens October presented1985, four to the NRC by the a'llegations (as Government itemize; in Attachment A) were found to cor.cern the mailing of letters by the alleger, Mr. Sam A. Milam, !!!, to various GE managers.

One such allegation involved a letter transmitting a portion cf Pr. M11am's work record while working for Mr. C. L. Cobler to Mr. W. Barrentine indicating overall QA deficiencies within GE. A discussion with Mr. Barrentine during NRC inspectice, he. 99900403/87-01 indicated he had never received such letter nor was he aware of its existence. Other allegations ir.volving letters written by Mr. Milam to other GE managers have also been attached for 01 to investigate.

B. Purpose of Investication

1. What is the basis for the belief that the violation of a regulatory requirement is more likely to have been intentional or te have resulted from careless disregard or reckless indifference than from error or oversight?  ;

Information in this record was dekted in acccrdance with the Freedom of Informat::.,

Act, exemptions 4 7

' folA.S'1*116 9/ 7 J-8808000122 080629 PDR FOIA p ,, f, ao y sca/lew/./ 'y- 4 BAUMAN87-036 PDR - - - - - - - -

l l

I . .: :::r :^ -.;.. - m rvn r m .w y- ^ .^ LZ -

2-Current information is inconclusive. The above cannot be determined without information to be developed during the requested investigation (i.e., whether GE management was aware of the potential safety concerns).

2. What are the potential regulatory requirements that my have been violated?

10 CFR Fart 21, specifically Sections 21.21 and 21.61.

3. If no violation is suspected, what is the specific regulatory concern?

N/A

4. Why is an investigation needed for regulatory acticn and what is the regulatcry imp 4ct of this matter, if true? ,

An investigation is needed at this time to determine 1) if the alleger, Mr. Sam Milam, did in fact mail the letters in question to GE maragement and 2-) if GE management received such letters. It should be noted that the May 22, 1902 ietter referenced in allegatier 1 was draf ted af ter Mr. Milam's sepsration from GE, which occurred or er about ApriT70,1982. In addition, a letter reviewed by NRC in Mr. Wiiem's work record contained the note Set mailed" written acrcss the page which may indicate Mr. Milam's reluctance durir.g this pe'iod to actually mail such letters.

The reg.latory impact of this matter concerns GE managerent having knewlec;e of potential safety concerns, as evice".ced by the supporting work rec:rd attached to each allegation referred withcut initiating proper action to resolve s'uch matters as required by GE Engineering Operati g Procedures addaessing conformance to 10 CFR Part 21.

C. Requester's f riority

1. Is the pricrity of the investigation high, norni, or low? Normal, d j

2. What is the estimated date when the results of the investigation are neeced? January 1988. f l

u / >

sY qT A, tY fFg bfi

- ~- -- -

' __. - i

': Z ;; ;;; .,;; Z ::L nvi r m rueut DI5CLU U L /j

• 3* .- / /7

/ ~

3. What is the basis for the date and e impact of not meeting this j /

d e.$

l Congressional interest exists ever resolving allegation issues at GE.

n =ary 1988 date woulc allow In miry stivo v. ne icavit1gation results (if appropriate to do so) into the next inspection report tentatively scieduled fer January - February 1988. The Vendor Inspec-tien Branch is scheduled te perform its rext inspection at GE Sa Jcse on November 9-13, 1987. 0 eccompaniment on this inspection wc'.'.c be encouraged to reselve these issues if 01 scheduling pertrits.

D. Contact

1. Staff nerters: R. Pettis, Jr. SPIS/VIB/ORIS U. Potapovs, Chief, SPIS/VIB/DRIS

2. A11eger's identificatier, with address and telephone nurtber if n:t c_cnf ide nti a l .

g Sam A. Milam, III 7

f4.6

---

J F. Other Relevant Inforeation Refer to Attachment B which includes additional supportive docur4ntet'en extracted direct 1/ from Mr. Milam's work r cord.

t ctor tel o, r Executive Dire for Operations Er. closures:

4 Excerpts from Mr, Stokes' Report Including Related Documentation From NRC Inspection Report No. 99900403/87-01 cc: E00 NRR OGC W. Russell, Region 1 J. N. Grace, Re ton 11 A. B. Davis, Re ion !!!

R. A. Martin, R gion IV J. B. Martin, Region Y OE

_ ..n. w ;;;;;C:;; - ,a , o , ;: :" ^"_^ :r /'. ::c,9?.cy? _

t .

ATTACHMENT A 1

l

, The Vender Inspection Branch recomends the following allegations be referred l to the Office of Investigations. Each allegation is extracted directly from )

Mr. Charles Stokes' (consultant to GAP) sumary of Mr. Milam's work record, fo11cwed by the inspection findings as presented in MRC Inspection Report No. 99/00403/87-01.

Allegation 1 Stekes Report Section 1.6 "First week of November 1978, the following line l was part of an entry: Bill Millard said either he would sign the ERHs or I l (Sam) cculd ferge his signature to them." (Clarification added by Mr. Stokes.) i Inspection Findings - During the inssection, a discussion was held with Mr.111 arc, in the presence of Mr. 3arton Smith, GE counsel, at which time ,

Mr. Millard denied any such statement about "forging' his signature.  !

Mr. Millere stated that it was cerraon practice for Project Managers (PMs) to  !

authorize other individuals to sign for them in instances where, for exuple, i logistics did not permit the PM easy access te sign such documents. The hRC )

inspectcr reviewed the responsibility given to the PM as cut 11ned in GE E0P '

l 40-6.10, Section 4.8a, to determine the significance placed on the PMs )

approval of such documents. The E0P states that the PH has the res >onsibility to apprcve ERMs for the purpose of authorizing the application of tie specific decument to the assigned project and to supply project information to the ,

initiating responsible engineer as requested. The PM is not responsible for l verifying or checking the technical adequacy of the document, because this has already been performed by the design engineer and the verifier. Because specific detail was not availabic as to the ERM referenced by Mr. Milam's work record entry ir: Nevember 1975, the inspector was unable to verify whether Mr. Milam signed his own name in lieu of Mr. Millard, or whether Mr. Milam "signed fer" Mr. Millard. As a result of this review, this item will rec.ain open.

Allegation 2 ,

Stekes Report Section 1.7 "Continuing with a problem of a similar reture on hovemher 14, 1976, a letter to C. W. Hart on the subject of the CNV connecticr.

had an interesting paragraph. It seems that the CNY elementary diagram drafting effort was subcontracted to an outside firm, the Power Division of C. F. Braun &

Company, in Alhastra, California. When completed, the diagrams were provided to the General Electric System Engineers for signature. The System Engineers felt that they were not being given sufficient time for review and refused to sign the documents. The documents were later signed by the C&EE CNY Engineer, without review.'

Inspection Findings During the inspection, discussions were held with Mr. c. W. Hart, Mr. Milam's supervisor during this period, who stated he had never received the November 14, 1978 letter. In addition, specific examples of insufficient review times could not be identified from the contnents contained in the ERMs or the discussion with Mr. Hart. As a result, this item will remain open.

. - - - - , - - _ , - . . . , _ _ , . , - , .,,.,_-.r .__--,,.~m,_,_,,.---..y-. _ , , . - , . . , _ _ , , . - . - . _ _

2-Allegation 3 -

StcLes Report Section 6.2 'Mr. Milam wrote a letter to W. M. Barrentir.e en April 14, 1952 about unauthorized, post signature changes. In this letter, Mr. Milam states that R. L. Reghitto made an authorized change to ERM AM.-2997 witheut Mr. Milam's knowledge and in direct conflict with specific instructions.*

Inspection Findings - A discussion during the inspecticn with Mr. Barrentine, in the presenet of Mr. Barton Seith, 6E counsel, inquired as to what actict.s were taken concerning this subject. Mr. Barrentine stated he had net rectived Mr. Milam's letter of April 14, 198E. He also stated that he was not awart ;f anyone else who might have known about the letter and $1so r.ight have acted on it in his (Mr. Barrentine's) place while he was on business travel. As a result, this issue will remain open.

Allegation 4 Stekes Regert section_6.3 "On May 22,1982, Mr. Mila.m wrote Hr. Barrectine a ietter and included a copy cf his wnrk record while working fer Mr. C. L. Cobler.

In this letter, Mr. Milam requested Mr. Barrentine to read about the en-going underworld of C&lD and says he tried to communicate some of these thirgs to Mr. Barrentine on several occasi.ons but was discouraged by Mr. Barrentine's managers and attitude. Mr. Milam says:

Since you no longer hold my form 38 (a star.dard threat), I have ncthing further to fear from either ycu or your conspiratorial ranagers. I hope, by sending you this Record, te give you a -

glirpse into that hidden world or uncontrolled bootleg activity l we all know so well.  ;

'Mr. Barrentine was the c.anagee of the huclear Control & Instrunentat'er Produ:t Desigr Operation (hC&!D) of (CAID). He was Mr. Hart's, Mr. Cobler's, Mr. Reghitto's, Mr. Stradack's, Mr.. Koslow's, and Mr. Wortham's supe' visor.

Mr. Milam had been notified of his layoff *when this last letter was nitten and his reference to form 38 had to do with the con _stant threat of layof f

. if you did not go alcng with the system. He did not." (Emphasis added by Mr. 5tekes.

_!_nspection Findings - A discussion during the inspection with Mr. Barrentine, ir. the presence of Mr. Barton Smitn, GE counsel, inquired as to what action was taker. by Mr. Barrentine when he received Mr. Milam's letter and wcrk record, which document problers Mr. Milam felt existed within the Control and Instrumentation Department (C&lD). Mr. Barrentine stated he never received the letter nor the portion of Mr. Milam's work record while he was assigned to Mr. C. L. Cobler. He did st0te that if he had received inforcation concerning problems within CalD he would have met with the managers and thoroughly researched the issues. Mr. Barrentine also stated that a Potential Reportable Condition (PRC) evaluation of Mr. Milam's concerns would have been initiated if warranted. As a result, this item will remain open.

=- . -- . . . . . . ..

l l

ATTACHMENT B Docune tation contained in the attachment represents information extracted direct',j frcm Mr. Milam's werk record in support of allegations contained under Attachment A.

4 5

l i j l '

l l I i .

'  ! l l 1 .

i .

t  !

I i

i 1

. /

i

. i .

ba *n. k. h *s \1 E .,

wk .re<.4).c weev es - .

~

I, .hetbkvtb f '"., M 3 w !. . r. . . H '4 ." D P C. ' ' o. *

"#? ) S U 'a '--

.t.

. n c -( [ d e ' t . r c ' e i's t. . w ,, r

• a c w g; ? 9MG17, .

h t?. - b o l A s s 4 . . k.\ g . . T. po d . - o *'*

• A *f i S c' eet ib l a lb . .

2 . Q ., r ' w a r.'s. g 5 k . P L 6 4 5 % t 'l e :s _ r e.1

,I..Ask k $c. e atiossec. $,d 4 c c c '. . .

2 Ieco d~. bio ,, d e s . p ! y .1

• e . .A {-

. H 1 1 - P b ,) C W *, )\ dge d.e 3 e s ' s p . :: , l . o ... f t.

.q. .beb-s ca " d .c s ~>

• r ,. <- d a. s . -

2 2# 34:

.. k. o l H 13-P(,o 1 5 b . c.-.-ee . Ha 3 d3:,s p:c v; . ,

.u . 4 f ;t .H d -f - e i p r w onn fdofLO .S l O l '.f. i .; o Al eh

$6M iu & 70 !d es .p neidt, fp e . t p e r. .u : e - e i -g .

grA-Pui 1.

r-Res.isI w ,( L..ese y<. e c. d u 4 j -. M ($a :; s.g -

i t, b 4 , >, . o f ' v- n W < t.. l . 6 5 0 I< , H . f - f c a L n >,. ~

( t Ga 4 ka  !

4 o b .. S L..( d.SedMck (= .he .

5 v. v .s ero I ._.wo & F n d . ei T, , , . > ., ( 4 .. - t .c.T '

. l .._.2 . 'e t.4,') . E.W 3: . l. .rese)lt. .c = I 'cs i. - 4,: i- i . :

.;6 1.-Pel.2. .c o.A 6 ). :. .. J. ) 3, n m_. ? d s ..

_m . , t .u r . . d .,

k s + 0e 4 0 . h be.e [> W Iws t' ses e d de v u e . s - taq

. . . . . w cl .l .d.og ad._wcre.. land)aI s. . .. < ,  : i - , E> <-

.., . . 'eN Q le..., !G 41 N.- c.4 ';. s'nh 4 9 *e ee n G' A' h2 A. W t .

.deu6c o 4 . . s h p . I ,w 'd.\ o ti j G-s.he.c..k a d ,: 2. '%

b '

c . f,I . .N d e'v .w : e n e <, 3 e .,s. .; e.e m i

.c. p n . ;. t u .c.47.e c sIa

. , 4 , r fra . , 0 4 : i ,w e

. f e c e. i s t , we a .co pe ,e t w q, . w '. W : sh5.;..,<l'is.e

{so ch.a- .HG-Pm.. , . l-Yv, b . , i.o n e ; R.',c; 5. o

. . M '.\ 'j f . ,- H .g e L . L w e h .1 % .,) J . ~ t L a 6

.L $t <.4 d e /.t.c imi t . We m ; u. k . , b w, 1, .

. Alu j Re;jka e a l e.a > y 5,e q e % ,, 0,, .. 5 , s ,,e

.w U { th n t.o.h i m; , .:. [ vr c<. , <.e e ( . ,, ,, r e a m !,,er

e i ,

1 5 l t i I

. l .

i 1

i 1 I S , . A . fC ub IIt .i W. < k r e. = r d b.= c . Me k 4 5

!. . d' .

I .

A. . Pep.s. e 4 ' li ta - P 'o l. 2. p s ewiy Ic it'.s e._ - .o d C.vr e.1 s'; L ,D e,c e.'L p: .- . . . .

s. 'a n i e a.. < . J .b e 1 $o L u -cec 9 go. l.

f.

o T .r. p e s ,n c. .W , c o ~ p a r t.o I :e w < c l i '.

d r w O -6: b.tu e.ew9-6.. osu<n>c

~ loeeA e m.p(o'ye.d j b.(..' W 4 s D[ E.it'IAIU.anitors Engineering and cautioned against "cosmetic or personal

, preference type changes" during engineering review.

The CNV Connection

1. Fago 2 W T.sition I would consider the foregoing text to constitute a coredy of errors. if it were funny. The humor dissolves, however, when one considers the positier. of Radiation Monitors Engineering. We are trying to coordinats a destp. ef fort between system enl i neers who want nothing to do with us, a draf ting ciganiza-tion that can't afford us, and a Projects department that is dissatisfied with our performance. If we do get the CNV panel drawings issued, it will r.ot be a tribute to the support we have been given. Furthermore, we r.sy ac: ::r;*e:e the project; I hear ugly rumors of upcoming CNV design change edicts, whi*e manage =ent is now gearir.g up to drop CNY work and begin H:pe Creek er.f !a1*17 Far be it from me to criticise my management, but 'I have only rvo cheeks :: turn If we cannot find some time in our empire building to a.lso build a few reae::rs.

I think vs should change our name to the Nuclaar F.mpire Building Grow; of the Generally Hectic Company.

Chw 3 .

San A. Kilan III eW 0

0 e

6 0

e 4

- - - , - - , , ,, , , - - , , - , - - - - , , , , , - , ~ , - - - ,v,- ,-v

IN t 14N F W 4

(,E T T $4 PERENC4rt)

~

CONTROL & INSTRUMINTATION DEPARTMENT San Jose, California April 14,1982 cc: F. D. Judge D. W. Reigel T. R. Wortham TO: W. M. Barrentine

SUBJECT:

Unauthorized, Post Signature Changes The attached letter is for your infomation. The change in questien was made by R. 1,. Reghitto. In spite of considerable effort by A. Koslow, the problem was not

_ sD__

Sam A. Milam !!! '

C&1 Te:5.ical 1.icensing

• SAFJpjw ATTACHWNT

1 l

'k  !

i s 9 2. to ter $(*s I

March 4, 1982

)

To: A. Koslow Engineering Review Her.:randus AML 2997, for which I am responsible, was changed after my signature, without my knowledge, and in direct conflict While with tie tracking specific ERN, I instructions I had given.

discovered what had happened and was able to retrieve the ERM from the issue cycle before it was issued.

I new have the EPM in ny possession and do not intend to issue it until the change is resolved to my satisfaction.

1 Although the change 'in question was unauthorized, another crucial point is the way in which the change was cade. Not only do I consider the action to be unethical and in conflict with the EOF, it has brought into question the value of the authority of the Responsible Engineer. I feel that management attentier. (

is needed to prevent a recurrence of this kind of situation.

w h0YD San A. Milam III C 6 I Te :hnical Licensing 1

0

- .._.---,,.n .

i  ;

' i

! l .

, i .

l -

, i

-s i- I

! l n -

i ,

4 . i , ,

n,~ ,1 Ai FRM i r k em, or, .Emc4L.L

.o M ,2 c6

. . , L , t, _ m was . m o 12 - i

• i . i  ;

i s4Ae + ";u,,.f.ea4re- A be __

res w Di a $ r_ sl lou 83 2k " was anon '

i f 4'e ,- N' i=.g m '/. H. u m hw dx. do -, 4L, r.#o r IL. A TL , h'. h a . ,s a h'h 5 .1, J w La+id. TL;s u if4 w an " &

Lst I,'_ 21. o u t o w n h ,= a J c L.a u g.e , " ___

ma d berpf k JB#@w i m

• 4- t ut k wS ' , Jo ~ ,2 4 +C, ek.a G . '

u . t. s i oc  !

? M cL1c.*

• 4- Q T.s s z e d A be ! (_6_$12e6L Q ,- s +k ne . i ;. 4 *, 21 s em W l Joomov4. J 26e d a-n-st?  ;

"Tk e n sku l) be x2n'i m. a'f4ef M.* 167 ' . Mutt wr o 'e v e __

e c_.__b ead r .e m 'o 12fle#s b

% anX, %_3 u-s :2- r

w. <es o n0J,9.1.s.iktu' LI, G 1lo e.L_e, ya e d e d

,oke. 'lo u ( fr ( ; t ' l '. C e ' f-ki s k#.As '

b o o , wi m ? -

ie - s l g ,,

gg -

912-et ___

I D1 : K O'.a b !-L '"~ ~ '

^

"" I *-b-- -

! m "o 1 JfAesea2 53 me MiEJ

• t 51_<MEYiTI= ,

(>Att pg,,(g g (

10 tNGB4G ENGINEEHffliG REVIEW MEMORAN0tMI T use SCHEDuttu ' pr vnw rewau _

patt omse t{g re 2IZ [2'd l gy,cw 2 _f 1-BZ _

OsteGaas AT Ost H- MEU E$ .9 T E_R _ O~I g ay,#OV AL 5eGN AT U.tt 5 I marc rw ssGas g os nesco.esisit e e c. gen oAvr F S*O*sSeet t f .eG gt t et OATE C Omor 18 8 2 L a',r,q y-t/c "r- t eg g

' %M k_ Mll AP"kk f

• 24"k 9 8 3 _4s%L ,

A .

i 8/Y"[h 1-g

"# "O"'I # A eE A oF at etw t asett.eF Act CosapAtssust sTv zeaooucie'urv

1. **eOM CT APPt .av eces '

i svser= AccuCAnow 8 ouALery A5stna ANCE

% ' """ g-a oa

3 l PWA 120 5 J B TEv1J 3 COD (. COMPti ANCE y potunegsey ouAtsyy tEADSv51teeE=GR oATE 5 A 4 esattsee As esiottss AerteCAffoes s overwar=1 or s.c= venir. car.o=

io osurn jg

- t Arrteno d 5v5't= Aart'CA'*o=

y e ,. E c.2 b o w ,s defe ce_d due -to M1'cM'Mi . '0!Av ven .CA,o. . A n .,~1 uwver,F.ea -

s. .t., a <mm.,E. see su ,e t- 3.

<&= n -

c co t,5 , M ' , # " '

! - ,,,,,, , ,, , , cy , o

'hata'acanod %Be do psy eszco '

,, 3 ,,n W oestnato venerscAfeous U*o55 et***

• ave n U e

,"o[,Q serview Assecesso nevenuesrs a gf g onouron arv ser "'$ nevicwen sic =Aruna o,y , , .

sysvru sset neo on sue to ,,7,,88,5,

,,,,,,, eAar no. o. Coat t,s, o.,, Come O SP GFAWDGULF 5 - DEFERREb BM - t o2.o _ 8%E3oqBA NA 2. - A n .1r wsuA.ws c .. s. a .= m -

Mf/a M

]

2 u-ut 19it ce N 6 /

)

t-14-81. vfl sT. A .L oit M 4 h M l 'llE RD 4 o . s u.~ ,.

j b$ _$ h d'5Doa5.b'e E m ee.- (.rl o . e- t ,

j

1 e x -d < cm hv- h r ei ..re , mr im & De s i r

% ,a F_a, fa be e. M.e neun g ,,aqc ule_

a l 1e_

I

_ l l e- refd < .ian . I e. Ns. y }{c ufA c ES 3 -- 8 L 3 bt .sv-4 Ag tho._.wL A _m_s ll.d _ [ -

l

' -C-w .3 -)r u.L . 4ro -u V 2A .S o. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .

! w I l'C A A ik L ur- .

(

l l

1 1

. e i r- s 1 p }W $-

1 s e 2 t

v 3 ee sl m

a i I

C. so W

C i b{ ,

EI I .9 Si g 5

!. 1m..gj y 1

I 4

is C 4  :

E 4 l 2.'E i

2 5

e N

V e

• e

~

4 50 . ;

i 4u i 0  : l Q i

- oa j s

C

• E k

~1 -g

• l5 f O '

w w DCrw %5 1

g J .

Y $ 6' 4

O 8- (

w% m e = ,

at D

a o 6 w s a w o w a y

=

g w t g 5

w $

C .y j 1

(U c 'E 2 *

) $ 9 '

@d i M $ ,so5:h 4

J 5 .

m. .

5 E-

S l

)es l ts l t *5

. c

.J ,

• y* .

[. g .

D l

2 3

Le R r r

E .y. ae r 3

f.

411

\

s r

l l

. men

- I r 1 ci s s < m a

- a s g

,

• a J5 g T g vi M 0 .

1 - -

..

• J:

2  % a eC *ns

~~ ,

) m ~  %

N

~

O 2 j w o - #

y=

,P $

l

% 5 5 r 5 W 4 o p .

V d' R @

\

y t( y G L o L ,

j p v C y * ' [

< g L i )

• W '> o t a s .- g' -

e - I I e

u C y [ 4

D g e c M 61

• P~ { M d M E

I e $ $s @ 5 o e ,

' y r p 3 *U 0 8 g

-h m 8 (b k -c 1 p 3e .

s -

s - x* ' F e-(5o n c s '

g se M 1 3 I j ,S s {

• / b)

• U.. m y wage m a #

1. " ) ll ,- .

2 e cc N

A j -

-. r, .s

% u"t

" <5: 1 .

*

• a -

V . ,,

o N V l,  :  ; 7 a N :c ty eeJ (a ac-NE  ; w* x .s e

j, c c N g r-IM J n w M 3 ..

3 cr V g

• O 4 \/

E # y - o 7 e r:1 mz 'd 9

~~ + w -

p

• o 2

f0 g

'~ ,,

d

• Q

) ci- s v  % $ J tcd hir

+F.n jgs W.

s k

sq C

< . *I">

N O

$ M F h. 2N g ~

'l *%

L j y N g, 4 rJ J @V A' f ~5 'h .

' mM e '

M .*

J w

W 5 7

.............w.....

i A. XC510" O* *I September 18, 1981 CC:

C. Parks l

h I a

E

? ~

TO: W.F. Gibford ,

B.P. Grim l j , G.B. Stramback )

[hhk w r o ::

$UBJECT: Transfer of Desian Responsibility

REFERENCES:

1) E0P 15 2.00, 3/2/79 '

2) E0P 20 2.82, 6/16/81 l

3) E0P 20-3.82,11/12/80 i

SC0e! 0F TRANSFER l This letter transfers design responsibility frem Components 901/903 te j Cer;cnent 913. The transfer applies to all FCO's and IED's for tne 4 projects listed. )

l

1. Grand Gulf 1/2 I

2. Riverberd 1/2 ,

3. Perry 1/2 WORK TO BE PERFORM _[_Q , .

Work to be perforced is defined by

1. PWA 1285JB, Rey. IJ

2. PWA 2123LD. Rev. B

3. PWA 1287KL, Rev.10 )

DURATION OF TRANSFER This transfer is effective on Septerber 19, 1981 and terminates on Febr.a*y 23 1952 for Grand Gulf and on Jan.ary 31, 1982 for Riverbend and Perry.

AUTHORITY Authority for this action is centained in E0P 15-2.00, paragrach 1. Th's letter shall becore part of the design documentation of all design we-t Oe'-

formed under this transfer of responsibility.

, , l 1

b~

U w. Reiget, r.anager CONCURRENCE: N ./ _.o$vT c[ /.t/ 7 Systems Engineering W.F. ;Giaford, Manager M/C 432 - Ext. 52094 C7popent901 ,,/ f J.h.jA/ __ ' - NXt/$!

8 P.' Grim, Manager ' /

/dC

)- Compong 90 (

N S , . ."wh Nb ]bt G.B. Stra*.Dack, Manager Ceeponent 913

~. -- . - - - - . _ . . - _ - . . - - - . - _ _ - . - . . _ _

. Fh' -

January 28, 1982 cc: C. Parks I

Q

) 7 o a

s~ 10: W. F. Gibford

< p A. Koslow G. 8. Stramback 2 p,8

$UBJECT: Transfer of Design Responsibility Extension f y; aco REFEREN:ES: 1) E09 15-2.00, 3/2/79

2) E0P 20-2.82, 6/16/81

3) E0P 20-3.82, 11/12/80 i SCOPE Or TRANSrER This le'.ter extends the transfer of design res:ensibility from Co .; ntr.ts 901/909 to Component 913. The transfer applies to all FCO's and IED's for the projects listed.

1. Grand Gulf 1/2

2. Riverbend 1/2

3. Perry 1/2 l W3K TO BE PERFOR.MED Work te be performe'd ts defined by l

1. 'WA 1285JB, Rev.1J

2. PWA 2123LD, Rev. 8

3. PWA 1287KL, Rev. 10 -

_DU. RAT 10', OF TRA'iSFER EXTENSION l

. This t sa.sfer extension is effective on Februn y 1,1952 and tereinates en Mar:n 21, 1982.

J AUTH03:Ty ..

Authority for this action is contained in E0P 15-2.00, paragraph 1.

This letter shall becont part of the desi9n d:cumntation of all design work perfomed under this transfer of responsibility.

f1 9 hi0. W. Reigel, Manager CONCURRENCE:

Lk W. F. Gibford, Manager l

I Syste=s Engineerin9 Cornponent 901 i M/C 432 - Ext. 52094 f, 1

/pjw ML&W .

5. 3.~ 5tedeosek, Acting Manage

, Component 909  !

d. W /

A. Leslow, Acting Manager r - a.nt 411

@ g (i'?,46MCEb IW bbd 4.

May 22,1902 l

l l

W. M. Barrentine '

General Electric Company 175 Curtner Avenue San Jose, Calir:rnia 95125 Dear Kr. Barrentine As you probably know, the attached '4ork Record is for ye w inf ornation. I generated this Recorc wn11e I was ir. C. L. Cobler's ur.i t . However, the Record is in principle no different from any of my other records.

T chose this one to send you si.: ply breause I happened , ,

to have an extra copy of it. 1 I rect- .end that you Op en the Record to a randomly selected locaticr. and read from there. *4 hat you read ,

will be typical of the ongoing underworld of C&IJ.  !

I tried to c .cmicate ser.e of these thin 5.s to you on several 00 asicr.: and was vigorously discourages by your r.anagers an: yo u own attitude. Since fou no longer hoic ny forn 30 (a s tandard threat), I have notning furtner to rear frer. either you or your conspiratorial managers.

I hope, by ser.cir.g you this Reccrd, to give you a gli.7 se intc that hidder. world of c. controlled boctleg ac tivity we al; ?.new so well. 7ne Record is f or your inf or..a tior..

Please read it.

Sincerely s _3.n o w San A. Milam III _

i 4+[Og $% ~

W. f q(V w "CJe~ g g/ V )N/n  ;

N

1. Cf f f , > y ,,p ,v' l CfMpfk'f S' f4 p 1

)

y . ,

v1 @ lgy W9"'

/'y d>l:b$$[{l

\

l l

J Forg  ??-8g b/7

9' /

Y / /

E ^\qfu.'k' 4 E#

v ,

/&

Y

,< h+ '

y E

f 2

k

/[>(*k.5lf'

[

ry; by? .'%

3 n

1. r(A e Fora t?- fr3g b//o

/ . , ' . ,, ,

. _,