ML20138H785

Intervenor Exhibit I-CCANP-90,consisting of Partial Transcript Re Decision to Replace Brown & Root on Project. Pp 1,355-1,358

ML20138H785
Person / Time
Site:	South Texas
Issue date:	07/17/1985
From:	NRC
To:
References
OL-I-CCANP-090, OL-I-CCANP-90, NUDOCS 8510290148
Download: ML20138H785 (5)

Text

j3,, \ 'Nfh/ fdL Goldberg - Cross f-dhdMh fd D 5 5.

I moved. b 2 There were other instances where the tray that s DX METir 3 install in terms of routing eas acceptable and UEN5t as 4 left instal d. ~65 00T , gt :ja 5 Howev *, all future cable tray igata ations DECC TNg7y((7 6 subsequent to the cision to c hange the s pore %fstem 7 were based on the revi d suppc rt syste .

8 0 So the determina ion was ally that the design 9 was inefficient but not inade e.

10 A That is correct, i t ar of support.

11 G In terms of su ort. But 1 those areas where 12 there was congestion you might even hav a safety problem 13 there if the cabl s were too clc se together. Is that 14 correct?

15 A hat's correct.

16 So in that case, the d esign was not only inem icient 17 bu inadequate.

18 A That's correct.

19 G In the draft report on contractor replacement that' 20 you went over with Mr. Boyle yesterday, OPC-25, do you have l

that with you?

21 l

j 22 ,

I have an extra copy, if you need it.

l 23 A. Yeah. I think I do. I'm not sure. OPC-25. I 24 don't think I do have it up here.

25 0 On Page 16, there are two blanks on Page 16.

KENNEDY REPORTING SERVICE INC.

I B510290148 850717 PDR ADOCK 0500049g 7800 SH0AL CAEEK BLVO 346 W All9 TIN TFY A% 7RM7 g4g G()

0 pon

F -1 J ,

l

,.e

>***{*

$ +s # d

+/s '*

pe44

. *+O

• s+

b

1. l/s M f / ', # #

vf s/

.v ob4

4 Goldbero - Cross

.. 1356 1

Obviously, one meant to name one company, and one 2

meant to name another company in the competition to replace 3

Brown & Root.

4 Can you tell me when those blanks were filled 5

in with Bechtel and Stone & Webster?

6 A. I'd have to see the formal issued version of this 7

that was in fact filled in and dated to answer your question.

8 G Okay.

9 Perhaps when you come back you can provide the 10 dated copy that would show you the answer to this question.

11 This is dated September 8th, as a draft. The 12 formal announcement of the replacement of Brown & Root was 13 on what date?

. l 14 g, y;think that was the 24th.

15 g Of September.

16 So that sometime between the 8th and the 24 th, 17 these blanks were filled in.

18 A Yes, that's correct.

19 4 In the process of filling in the blanks, could you 20 just move us from this draft to the discussions that took 21 place between the 8th and the 24th? Who talked about it?

22 Who made the decision? How were the blanks filled in?

23 A. We had received responses to our requests for 24 proposal that were in our view responsive inputs from 25 Bechtel, from Stone & Webster and from Ebasco.

KENNEDY REPORTING SERVICE INC.

7800 SH0AL CREEK BLVD.- 3A6 W t.fl% TIN Tf f A9 727;7

g ,

icj 5, , Goldburg - Cross ,qq, 1 W2 had a review team consisting of three key 2 persons; Mr. George Oprea, our Executive Vice-President 3 Nuclear; Mr. Jack Newman, the attorney f rom Newman- Fioltzinger--

4 in those days it was Lowenstein, Newman, Reis and Axelrad--

5 and myself.

6 We basically individually prepared rating sheets 7 as to how we saw the various contractors in terms of 8 their attributes, in terms of depth, experience, people they 9 were willing to commit to our particular project, the 10 ability to commit them in the time frame that was necessary 11 to support our interests.

12 What we saw as their overall work load in the 13 likelihood that we would be able to get the resources that-14 we needed. Certainly the commercial terms / contractual 15 features.

16 And after we went through our rating, we met to 17 exchange our views as to how we saw their attributes.

18 We subsequently met with Don Jordan, our Chief 19 Executive Officer, and reviewed all the information with 20 Mr. Jordan.

21 That enabled Mr. Jordan to formulate his own opinions 22 about the strengths of these alternatives.

23 So in effect the final deciding body became four.

24 We had Mr. Jordan, Mr. Oprea, Mr. Newman, and myself.

25 And after a lot of discussion, it was decided KENNEDY REPORTING SERVICE INC.

7800 SHOAL CREEK BLVD 346 W AIK T:P. f r y Aq 7A 7'.7

Sj6 Goldberg - Cross 1358

.' 1 Bechtel offered the best hope to satisfy the needs of our

.- 2 job.

i 3

Fo they were the chosen replacement for Brown &

4 Root.

5 The runner up was Stone & Webster, and Ebasco 6 finished third.

7 0 In the initial evaluations of Mr. Oprea and 8 Mr. Newman, did Bechtel come out first or did Stone & Webster 9 come out first?

10 A As I recall, I think Mr. Newnan favored Stone &

11 Webster and I think Mr. Oprea favored Bechtel.

12 0 Apparently from this memorandum, another concern 13 was t. impact of replacing Brawn & Root on licensing o 14 the projec .

15 I no on Page 17, there is a footno which 16 reads, in part:

17 "The replacem_7t of E &R wil undoubtedly 18 have to be considered 1 the current operating 19 -

license hearing and com ic

• ions may thus arise 20 as to the timing of he ta ke ov of responsibilities f

21 of the new con' actor."

22 J

What ere the considerations in reg d to 23 licensing at you had to deal with in terms of re lacing 24 Brown Root?

25 A. Well, we certainly had to review these matters l /

KENNEDY REPORTING SERVICE INC.

7800 SHOAL CREEK BLVO 346 W All4 FIN fryAr 73't.7