CONTACTS 
0201 - Dawson Mechanical Engineer         510 254 8582
020101 - Mr. Percy B. Dawson; =415 442 7421

SUBJECTS
Voith Contract Closeout
Scope Statement
Engineering Management, 911011
Opinion Contract Requirements,
Industry Standards; Expert Opinion
Evidence of Defective Work
Submit Shop Drawings for approval, review
Replace v. Retrofit, 920120
Submittals, complete review, 911118
Fast Track, Concurrent Engineering

1312 -    ..
1313 - Summary
1314 -
131401 - Percy inspected the plant and explained what a professional review of
131402 - the speed increaser design would entail.
131403 -
131404 - He is capable and provided important, timely advice to DNRC.
131405 -
131406 - Consideration should be given to pay his travel expense.
131407 -
131408 -
1315 -
1316 -
1317 - Plant inspection
1318 -
131801 - Walt and Mike took Percy to the Broadwater plant.  Upon return, Walt
131802 - indicated they had done most of the standardized questions Walt has
131803 - used with interviewees.  Mike indicated he feels Percy is the most
131804 - qualified engineer interviewed so far on the speed increaser.
131805 -
131806 - Prior to the plant inspection, Percy and Rod Welch had breakfast and
131807 - discussed issues between Voith and DNRC, ref SDS 2 and DIP 1 to DNRC.
131808 -
131809 -
1319 -
1320 -
1321 - 1250 Lunch & Discussions
1322 -
132201 - Walt, Mike and I took Percy to lunch, then we met in the Engineering
132202 - Library to continue the interview.  Sarah joined us for that
132203 - interview.
132204 -
132205 -
132206 - Scope of Speed Increaser
132207 - Submittal Review
132208 -
132209 - Percy seems very capable of doing the review to determine the adequacy
132210 - of the speed increaser.  He explained to Walt that in light of the
132211 - prior difficulties of this unit, DNRC must insist upon reviewing all
132212 - of the design information needed to make sure the speed increaser is
132213 - adequate.  He emphasized that an equipment failure places the owner
132214 - and contractor on notice to perform a more thorough review of the
132215 - design and workmanship of the contractor.
132216 -
132217 -    Examples
132218 -
132219 -    Walt asked for examples of things that should be reviewed by the
132220 -    Engineer in the contractor's shop drawings.
132221 -
132222 -    Besides checking AGMA calculations, Percy mentioned that stress and
132223 -    vibration analyses are needed, structural support systems, and
132224 -    mechanical and electrical subystems all need review.  He gave an
132225 -    example of how the design of a support for a connecting shaft had
132226 -    failed because the moment was taken at the support interface rather
132227 -    than the axis of the shaft.
132228 -
132229 -
132230 - Other Voith Equipment
132231 - Subject to Review
132232 -
132233 - This same approach is needed of other Voith equipment for which the
132234 - record indicates that the review of contractor submittals by the
132235 - Engineer may have been perfunctory and/or inadequate.
132236 -
132237 -
132238 -
132239 - Project Management Critical
132240 -
132241 - Percy also pointed out candidly that the most important issue is get-
132242 - ting sound project management in place who can approach the issues
132243 - within industry standards for engineers on resolving defective work
132244 - problems.
132245 -
132246 -
132247 - Full Operation Test
132248 -
132249 - Percy indicated that after the punch list work is complete, including
132250 - the speed increaser, there should be another 30 day full operation
132251 - test with adequate Engineering supervision.
132252 -
132253 -
132254 -
132255 - During the meeting, Sarah delivered the Federal Express package from
132256 - Tudor that includes more information on speed increaser submittals.
132257 - Included seemed to be AGMA calculations that are missing from the
132258 - Tudor jobsite files.
132259 -
132260 -
132261 - Voith Submitted
132262 - AGMA Calculations for Helecial Gear
132263 -
132264 - Percy glanced through some of this information handed to him by Walt,
132265 - and observed that it seems to refer to helical gears as specified in
132266 - the contract, rather than spur gear data which Voith maintains it
132267 - supplied.  Mike Sims noted that the valuations for the gear factors
132268 - may be those for a spur gear even though the language describes a
132269 - helical gear.  [this requires research]
132270 -
132271 -     Errors Found on MK's Project
132272 -
132273 -     Percy explained the review he recently performed on AGMA calcula-
132274 -     tions submitted by Philadelphia Gear on a project where MK is the
132275 -     project engineer.  He found numerous mathamatical errors in the
132276 -     contractor's computer submittal which required correction prior to
132277 -     manufacturer.  He would expect to perform a similar evaluation of
132278 -     Voith's submittals on the Broadwater project.
132279 -
132280 -
132281 -
132282 - History of Speed Increaser
132283 - Problems in US
132284 -
132285 - Percy believes speed increasers have a history in the US of diffi-
132286 - culties.  It is not clear whether there was sufficient in 1988, 1989
132287 - to have alerted Tudor to give this matter greater attention and care
132288 - in review of shop drawings.
132289 -
132290 - Percy also indicated speed increasers are relatively new technology in
132291 - the US on hydro electric plants.  He feels this is another reason for
132292 - careful review of contractor's shop drawings.
132293 -
132294 - He explained that for the Broadwater site a speed increaser may have
132295 - been the best engineering solution.
132296 -
132297 -
132298 - Fast Track Design Limitations
132299 -
132300 - Sarah asked Percy if in his experience a "fast track" project would
132301 - have called for less vigilent review of the speed increaser shop
132302 - drawings than might otherwise be required for a regular project?
132303 -
132304 - Percy feels that "fast track" refers to specifying a shorter time
132305 - frame for a project [generally achieved by increased staffing, longer
132306 - work days, multiple shifting] than would result from applying typical
132307 - scheduling methods.  He advised that most hydro electric projects are
132308 - built using the phased design/construct procedure used on Broadwater,
132309 - where the equipment contract is awarded and that contractor then
132310 - furnishes information for the design of the powerhouse.  This proced-
132311 - ure alone would not comprise a "fast track" hydro electric project.
132312 -
132313 - He explained that in all cases, however, it is important for the
132314 - engineer to make clear in the contract specifications the design
132315 - criteria to be met by the equipment manufacturer and for the engineer
132316 - to then review the contractor's proposed design to make sure it will
132317 - accomplish the criteria set out in the specifications.  Percy cited
132318 - the historical problems with speed increasers as warranting particular
132319 - attention.
132320 -
132321 - Percy indicated that in his experience the time frame of the project
132322 - does not relieve either the contractor nor the engineer for properly
132323 - designing, reviewing and constructing the work.  Shorter time frames
132324 - can increase the cost by requiring much greater resources (men and
132325 - equipment) to accomplish the same work in a shorter time frame.  Fast
132326 - track affects the efficiency by which the steps to construct the work
132327 - correctly are carried out, but it does not relieve the requirement to
132328 - make sure the work is constructed correctly.
132329 -
132330 -
132331 - Consultants
132332 - Written Recommendations
132333 -
132334 - Percy explained his experience of requiring written opinions from
132335 - consultants on their findings.  This information is then evaluated
132336 - with the contractor's information to form a final written opinion on
132337 - the adequacy of the contractor's design and to support the Engineer's
132338 - direction to the contractor.
132339 -
132340 - If he accepted the assignment to evaluate the speed increaser, he
132341 - would require written findings from Geartech and Maritech to support
132342 - his work.
132343 -
132344 -
1324 -

SUBJECTS
Voith Contract Closeout
Scope Statement
Engineering Management, 911011
Interview Engineers
Termination

1508 - Evaluation
1509 -
150901 - Sarah feels Bill Larsen showed in recent phone conversations that he
150902 - would make a better expert witness than Percy.  She feels Percy would
150903 - not stand up under cross examination.  I explained that in my experi-
150904 - ence as an arbitrator I found Percy's demeanor acceptable and his
150905 - presentation knowledgable and credible.  Percy has been highly
150906 - recommended by Stone & Webster and more recently by Morrison Knudson
150907 - Engineers based on his work on the Idaho Falls project, ref SDS 2 line
150908 - 051206.
150909 -
150910 - I was also struck by the seeming increase in his energy level as we
150911 - got into the subject.  Mike commented on this as well.  In any event,
150912 - Percy's age is a factor in the selection from a health and availa-
150913 - bility standpoint.
150914 -
150915 - Percy's stature in the industry and his knowledge may encourage Voith
150916 - to avoid the kind of tactical delays they have used so far in dealing
150917 - with DNRC staff.  Percy appears to have the skill and experience to do
150918 - the engineering review information upon which sound management deci-
150919 - sions can be made which are needed for the Jan 14, session in York.
150920 -
150921 -
150922 - Interview Bill Larsen
150923 -
150924 - The previous interviews have disclosed more knowledge about the
150925 - material issues involved in selecting an engineer.  Bill Larsen should
150926 - be interviewed personally, to see if his youth and other capabilities
150927 - warrant selection above Percy Dawson.
150928 -
150929 -
150930 -
150931 - Geartech's Opinion
150932 -
150933 - Since DNRC is relying on Geartech and since Percy Dawson has also used
150934 - Geartech for gear set analysis, Geartech's opinion of Percy may be
150935 - helpful to determine the quality of Percy's work and the difference in
150936 - scope between what Geartech does and what Percy would do.  If
150937 - Geartech has worked with both Dawson and Larsen, his common
150938 - experience may be helpful.
150939 -
150940 -
150941 -
150942 - Payment of Percy's Travel Expense
150943 -
150944 - I recommend that DNRC pay Percy for his travel expense and maintain
150945 - contact with him.  Even if he is not initially selected, he is a very
150946 - valuable resource.
150947 -
150948 -
1510 -
1511 -
1512 - Next step
1513 -
151301 - I suggested again to Walt that he request the following from HKM and
151302 - Power Engineering (his initial choices for Engineer).
151303 -
151304 -
151305 -     1.  Proposed agreement terms.
151306 -     2.  Anticiapted budget and schedule.
151307 -     3.  Initial work plan.
151308 -     4.  Names of engineers they offer for speed increaser review
151309 -         and hydro electric engineering experience.
151310 -
151311 -
1514 -
1515 -
1516 - 1720 Discussion with Sarah and Wayne
1517 -
151701 - Sarah said Walt requested this afternoon the above items from Acres,
151702 - HKM and Power Engineering.
151703 -
1518 -