CONTACTS 
0201 - Morrison Knudsen Engineers, Inc.   415 442 7300
020101 - Mr. Ian M. Mousley; Manager =415 442 7655 fax 7673
020102 - Project Control Systems, Transportation & Water Resources
020103 - Mr. Ben Hakimi; =415 442 7414
020104 - Project Control Systems, Transportation & Water Resources
020105 - Mr. Richard W. Everett; Chief of Planning Department =415 442 7754
020106 - Water and Power Division

SUBJECTS
Voith Contract Closeout
Opinion Contract Requirements,
Industry Standards, 911005
Expert opinions
Submittals, complete review, 911118
Engineering, Professional Standards
Contract Disputes
Fast Track

1010 -    ..
1011 - Summary
1012 -
101201 - Richard provided a little deeper insight into standards of review for
101202 - the engineering profession on hydro electric plants.  He was somewhat
101203 - more reserved today as a result of having discussed the matter with MK
101204 - management.
101205 -
101206 -
1013 -
1014 -
1015 - Submittal Review Standards
1016 -
101601 - Richard indicated he has discussed the Montana DNRC matter internally
101602 - at MK and received instructions not to discuss engineer review stand-
101603 - ards in connection with that project.
101604 -
101605 - We discussed the matter however in general.
101606 -
101607 - He has not encountered the term "fast track" on hydro electric pro-
101608 - jects MK has done.  Richard confirmed my understanding from the dis-
101609 - cussion with Percy Dawson that hydro electric projects are generally
101610 - developed in the manner used on Broadwater where the engineer prepares
101611 - a bid specification for the equipment, and the information developed
101612 - from the successful bid and subsequent submittals from the contractor
101613 - is used to design the powerhouse contract.
101614 -
101615 - Standard of Submittal Review
101616 -
101617 - Richard said a major issue to be resolved between owner and engineer
101618 - is the level of submittal review.  He feels the engineer should
101619 - present to the owner the options, risks and costs of various levels of
101620 - submittal review so a budget can be set to accomplish the owner's
101621 - objectives.
101622 -
101623 - The "design life" of the project and the particular equipment supplied
101624 - is a critical aspect of engineering review.  The Engineer typically
101625 - evaluates whether the proposed materials and design will likely result
101626 - in the design life.
101627 -
101628 - Richard has not encountered the standard of "design concept" as
101629 - applied to the Engineer's review of contractor's submittals.
101630 -
101631 -     Comment
101632 -
101633 -     One would by definition determine whether the contractor submitted
101634 -     equipment for a hydro electric plant rather than say a steam or
101635 -     coal fired generator as a means to conform to "design concept."
101636 -
101637 -
101638 -
101639 - Professional Standards Publications
101640 -
101641 - Some of these issues may be addressed in the:
101642 -
101643 -                 Manual of Professional Practice for
101644 -                 Quality in the Constructed Project;
101645 -
101646 -    ...discussed with Jeff at ref SDS 2 line 081001.
101647 -
101648 -
101649 -
101650 -
1017 -
1018 -
1019 - Engineer Performance
1020 -
102001 - I asked Richard about how owner's track performance of their Engineers
102002 - to ensure things are done properly?
102003 -
102004 - He said this is another difficult area.  Some owner's have experienced
102005 - construction managers on staff, but often they are spread too thin too
102006 - keep up with the daily grind of paper and decisions on a particular
102007 - job.
102008 -
102009 -
102010 - Construction Managers
102011 -
102012 - Owner's use construction managers under various terms to either assist
102013 - and advise the owner or in some cases oversee the design, construction
102014 - and commissioning of projects.  In that case the engineer reports to
102015 - the CM.  MK does a lot of this work.
102016 -
102017 -
102018 - Audit Engineer
102019 -
102020 - On some large construction projects the owner hires a second Engineer
102021 - to periodically audit the performance of the project team (owner,
102022 - engineer and contractors), as a means to identify weaknesses in
102023 - management that could result in damage to the owner.
102024 -
102025 - This results in a significant report on all aspects of mangement with
102026 - respect to compliance with contract provisions.  It is not looked on
102027 - favorably by Engineering firms.
102028 -
102029 - He said most smaller projects [like Broadwater] cannot justify the
102030 - cost of this procedure.
102031 -
102032 -
1021 -

SUBJECTS
SDS program, Sales Contacts
Demonstrations; Sales discussions

1205 - Summary
1206 -
120601 - When I introduced myself, the secretary remembered my name and that
120602 - Welch Company had done a presentation in April of 1990 of SDS.  She
120603 - said she was told it was a very imprerssive program, see ref SDS 1
120604 - line 040801.
120605 -
120606 - After our discussion on engineering management for DNRC, Dick asked
120607 - how I remember so much of the details of our prior discussions.  I
120608 - mentioned reviewing the SDS notes at ref SDS 7 line 090901, and this
120609 - led to a brief explanation of SDS.
120610 -
120611 - He said that could be helpful at MK, and asked to see a demonstration
120612 - sometime.  I agreed to follow up the next time I am in town.
120613 -
120614 -
120615 -
120616 -
120617 -
1207 -
1208 -
1209 - 1635 called talked to Ian Mousley
1210 -
121001 - While I was in town, decided to follow up dialog with Ian Mousley.
121002 -
121003 - Ian remembered considering some written materail on SDS several years
121004 - ago.  He feels the existing computer programs in use at MK for
121005 - management support are resulting in staff spending 6 hours on the
121006 - computer to produce one hour of work.
121007 -
121008 - I agreed this is the level of capability of many software programs,
121009 - but that SDS is different.  Ian was not receptive to this idea, but
121010 - was gracious in saying that the credibility of my position has been
121011 - too greatly harmed by MK's experience for Ian to spend more time on
121012 - evaluating SDS.
121013 -
121014 - I asked about the procedure to follow if a vendor feels it has a
121015 - product that can help MK make a lot more money, how would this be
121016 - evaluated at MK.
121017 -
121018 - Ian suggested I call Peter Budelov - this person might refer us to a
121019 - group in Boise.
121020 -
121021 -
1211 -
1212 -
1213 - 1645 called Peter Budeluv
1214 -
121401 - Left message on Pete's answering machine for him to call tomorrow or
121402 - Thursday or Friday.
121403 -
121404 -
121405 -
1215 -