ML19261D326
| ML19261D326 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Fort Calhoun  |
| Issue date: | 05/24/1979 |
| From: | Short T OMAHA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT |
| To: | Reid R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7906050346 | |
| Download: ML19261D326 (24) | |
Text
((#" "'*%[g UNITED STATES NUCLEAR r EGULATORY COMMISSION D w(* g WASHINGYON, D. C. 2 css 5 as t'
8
,.o#
April 26, 1979 u,<
OFFICE OF THE CH AIRM AN The Honorabl' J. Bennett Johnston, Chairman e
Subco:::nittee on Energy and Water Development Comittee on Appropriations United States Senate Washington, D.C. 20510
Dear Mr. Chairman:
In January 1979, we forwarded to you our planned use of FY 1978 unobligated funds for FY 1979 priority programs and solicited your approval. We indicated that these funds provided for some of the Congressionally-directed initiatives. We e.lso centioned that we were in the process of performing an agency-wide assessment of our programs tcward continuing support of Congressionally-directed initiatives and to accommodate changes in program requirerents that have evolved since our budget was sent to the Congress a year ago.
This letter is to inform you that we have cocpleted such an assessment and to request your approval of the necessary reprograming of resources that we have indicated in the enclosures.
For your information, Enclosure 1 identifies Congressional initiatives described in NRC's FY 1979 Authorization Act and legislative history and NRC's proposed actions to suppoc t these initiativas. You will note that, in some instances, we propose somewhat less effort than the Congress identified. This is due in part to our limited ability to match our FY 1979 appropriations availability with authorization program direction.
In other cases, it results from updated changes in policy affecting certain programs. An exacple is the Administration's decision in conjunc-tion with the FY 1980 budget to no longer support a national gas reacter program (HGTR).
In accordance with ycur procedures on reprogram:ning, we are providing you with our initial Base Table for FY 1979 with explanations for the funding changes identifying those that require your approval. Sore of these adjustments were identified in the letter you received on our planned use of FY 1978 unobligated funds. We appreciate your early consideration of these proposed reprogrammings.
Also, it should be noted that the Co: mission is ncw in the midst of a review of the irpact on FY 1979 and subsequent years of the accident at Three-Mile 7 906 050 7/g 2209 015
l t
i The Honorable J. Bennett Johnston !
l Island Unit 2.
It is estimated that it wi.ll take several week.3 to co.rpl.^te l
a cogret.ensive assessment of the fiscal inpact. The results of our resiew cay necessitate propcsing additional reprograrming actions in FY 1979. The l
NRC will keep Congress apprised of the progress of our revial.
l Sincerely, i,
/
L L f-C.-
wC
-Joseph M. Hendrie Chairman
Enclosure:
As stated cc: Sen. Mark O. Hatfield 2209 016
'r U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY C0fEISSION FY 1979 BUDGET froposedStatusofCongressionalInitiatiYesAuthorized Program Support Program Peoole Amount Initiative:
NRR 35 added To expedite the processing of reactor licensing applications and resolution of unresolved generic safety problems.
NRC's Proposed Proortn:
NRR 15 added S 900K With no increase in positions above NRC's original request provided by the Appropriation Act, we have reprogrammed 15 positions from lower priority areas.
We are continually reviewing staff positions for reallocation to this high priority effort without disrupting other programmatic effort, however the FY 1980 President's. budget requests an additional 85 positions. The 5900K increase in contractual support (requested to be programmed from prior year unobligated balance carry-over) will provide contractor assistance to the NRR staff to deal with licensing action on operating plants.
Initiative:
NRR 18
$ 1,200K Advanced Reactor Efforts NRC's Proposed Program:
NRR 10
- S 1,030K The Cc =ission believes that the Congressional initiative can be met by expending only S1,030,000 in contractual support and not requiring any. additional positions.
This is based on projected fuel cycle alternatives, other advanced reactor concepts forecasted.to be submitted by DOE, resources necessary to monitor the operation of For: St. Vrain (HTGM and the current forecast of no HTGR pre-application review being requirea in FY 1979 or FY 1980.
It is requested that the authorized funding for this effort be reduced to NRC's proposed program.
Initiative:
SD S 650K Low-level radiation activities NRC's prooosed Procram:
SD S 650K This initiative represents a S500K increase above the appropriated amount. These funds have been reprogramed from other areas within Standards Development for this effort. '
2209 017
Program Support Pretram People Amount Initiative:
NMiS 47 S 5,965K Nuclear Waste Disposal and Management Activities NRC's Proposed Procrams:
NMSS 48
$ 8,715K
, This initiative represents a iO position and $840K in program support increase above the appropriated amounts. Funding in the amount of S3,590K has been reprogramed to provide increased resources.
Of_this amount, $1,650K comes from prior year unobligated balances, 840K has been reprogrammed from other areas within NMSS, S800K has been reprogrammed from the RES and NMSS safeguards program, and $300K from RES Systems Engineering program.
Initiative:
NMSS 4 added S
165K To increase the ability of NMSS to participate in activities related to safeguarding nuclear exports.
NRC's Procosed Proaram:
NMSS 2 added S
210K This initiative represents a 4 position increase above the appropriated amount.
Of the 4 positions, 2 were to be directed to the effort of strengthening IAEA Safecuards and 2 were for more expeditious implementation of the US/IAFA Safeouards 6grdment. The Senate has yet to ratify the US/IAEA Safeguards Agreement, therefore, th additional positions for this effort are not needed. With regard to the 2 positions for. strengthening international safeguards, a recent reorganization within the Division of Safeguards, reflects a level of effort for th-is area consistent with the Congressional intent.
Initiative:
RES ~S 1,500K Implementation of the Improved Safety Systems Research plan.
NRC's Proposed Procram:
RES 1
S 800K This initiative represents a $1.5 million increase above the api ~opriated amount.
The $800K will be used to initiate efforts to evaluate alternate containment concepts, evaluate alternate decay heat removal systems, and development of improvement to value/ impact methodology in order to better quantify assessment of proposed improved safety concepts. 5400K has been reprogrammed from Safeguards research and the. remaining $400K is being provided from prior year unabligated balance carry-over. Although tbis effort is S0.7 million below the authorized amount, the Comission believes that additional funds in FY 1979 for this effort could not be used effectively, particularly in view of the Administration allowance for only $1.0 million being requested in NRC's FY 1980 budget.
It.is requested that the Authorized funding for this effort be reduced to 5800,0D0 for program support.
2209 018
Program Support Program Pecole Amount Initiatihe:
RES 7
$ 4,100K
!!uclear Waste Research actihities NRC's Proooced Program:
RES 8
5 4,450K Tnis program will accomodate the Congressional initiatihe on Waste Research.
Initiative:
RES 15 S18,000K Advanced Reactor "... including $3,900,000 to accelerate the effort in gas cooled thermal reactor safety research".
liRC's Prooosed Program:
RES 15 516,200K Thisinitiatiherepresents$1.0millionforgas.and$1.5millionforadhanced reactor research above the appropriated amounts.
It is requested of the Co.mittees that no additional funds be applied to. gas reactors. The current forecast is that there will be no applications in FY 1979 for gas reactors.
Also, in FY 1980, the Administration has decided not to pursue a national HTGR program.
A total of $0.8 million is being added to advanced converters. This S0.8 million comes from prior year unobligated balances. These funds will be primarily used for review and evaluation of NASAP/INFCE reactor and fuel, cycle. concepts and follow-on alternative technologies. The Comission believes that additional funds could not be used effectively during FY 1979.
It is requested that the authorized funding for both these efforts be reduced to S16,200,000 for program support.
Initiative:
PDA 4
5 20K Equalemploymentopportunityactihities fiRC's Procosed Program:
PDA 3
S 20K The Cornission is reviawing staffing positions for allocation to this effort.
The Commission's FY 1980 budget provides for 4 positions for this activity.
When the review is completed, the Comittees will be notified of the results.
2209 019
4-Program Support Program Peoole Amount Initiatihe:
ALL
$1000K1/
Studies and analysis of alternative fuel cycles NRC's Proposed Program:
RES 5
S 800K This effort is described under the Advanced Reactors initiative for the RES program.
It is requested that the authorized amount for this effort-be reduced to $800,000 for program support.because the Commission telieves that additional funds could not be used effectively during FY 1979.
1/ This initiative was for a total of $1,000,000 for people costs and program support.
e e
e O
2209 020 9
LEauga N d
803 1 5
1 40 5 003 3
e 131 6 4
990 8 11 6 8
3, 0, 9,2, 3,
3,9 0,3, 227,1, s
ievs 410 6
4 1
6 8 78 ea 4 4 1
3 3 22 RB
/
.b n,
405 1
- 66 058 3
n 528 1
22 448 9
at 131,7, 2 + 6,4, 11 rs
- +
gu 2
1 2 2 oj
+ +
+
+
rd PA fa 8 - 8 0
601 5
- - 0 0
r
.s 2
8 4
207 5
5 5
Y t rt 5
2 2
932 3
4 4
rias
+
+ - -
+
ompu imnj rood PCCA NO I 9 S7 s
000 0
5 505 0
055 0
s 054 9
4 624 3
562 4
S9 I1 t p e
0, 3, 4,7, 3,
4 4,1,0, 415,1, M
)
eoyr MY s grBg 518 4
4 16 8
5 6
OFd d p n
3 4
1 3
3 2
2 C
n up o
R a BA C
Y0s Rr u O
5 000 0
055 0
002 2
3 003 3
073 6
UAn 1
11 5 7
3+2 4
GTi
.t 859 2,
E rs
+ -
RE s gu 1
S r nj RAa od ABl CA E
NT 000 0
0 505 0
000 0
I
.N 056 1
8 627 6
596 0
7,6, 7
8,8 3,0, 4,
5 5,6,7, SI te sg 5
9 6
4 1 6 8
5 6
U ed 3
4 1
3 3
2 2
ru PB d
n f
t l
n o
I n
a a
i e
i s
t m
r y
d e
e t
r a
l t
c t
e a
u n
r a
f u
m g
e o
M a
g a
e s
m f
S e
r R
t s p
n f
g cr o
E l
a o
r eo l
s a
S n
r o
jt e
d e
i
/
r ol /
P t
oc/
v n
i c
ra1 e
a t
1 e s i a 1-a P e D
i t
d t n e
R l
n l s l
a r ao l
ra s
o id ra M a ti ra R
l
) )s._
ad et d
i cret u
rt et NNDD r
ceho r
t aah o r g oah o
~
J Cr_
a ictt a
c F ut t a e pntt c-e nnOb d
e gob e f srOb l
ha u
n pl e u
l a
ne u
c cvl S a
s efl S c S atl S u
edl t
n ual u
rnl N
TAA S
I FSA N
TI A
-Budget Prior Yr.
Approp.
Conmit. &
P res.
Congr.
By Compar.
Progranin.
Revised Budget Adjust.
Congress Adjusts.
af Adjust.
b_/ Base Nuclear Regulatory Research:
Systems Engineerin9
$ 35,600
$ -2,370
$ 33,230
$ -1,500
$ +1,6'92
$ 33,422 Code Developcent 9,900
-900 9,000
+330 9,330 Fuel Behavior 22,800
-300 22,500
-l,672 20,828 Primary Systems Integrity 8,400
-800 7,600
+800 8,400 Advanced Converters 2,400
+500 2,900
+800 3,700 Safeguards 6,200
-200 6,000
-1,000 5,06c Risk Assessment 3,400
-400 3,000
+1,400 4.400 All Other -1/
74,770
-145 74,625
+1,500
-2,080 74,045 Subtotal 163,470
$ -4,615
$158,855
$ + 270
$159,125 Program Technical Support:
1/
$ 13,400
-476
$ 12,924
$ 12,924 Pro 9 ram Direction and Adminis tra tion:
1/
$ 27,950
-733
$ 27,217
$ +1,191
-564
$ 27,844 N
tv Total New Obli9ational a
Authority
$330,670
$ -8,369
$322,301
+856
$ +3,910
$327,067 sa finobligated Balance Carryover
$ A,805
-856
$ -3,910 39 TOTAL OBLIGAT10NAL AVAILABILITY
$330,670
$327,106
$327,106 1/
Includes the following items which received a specific reduction by Congress, but not applied by Congress to specific programs:
Per. Comp. & Bene.
$ 91,760
-894
$ 90,866
$ 90,866 Administrative Support
$ 31,940
-900
$ 31,040
+991
$ 32,031 Travel
$ 6,780
-290
$ 6,490
+230
$ 6,720 a/ b/ See following pages for explanation of changes.
a.
Explanation of changes included in the " Prior Year Commitments and Comparability Adjustments" Column:
1.
NRR -
Technical Projects S
-528,000 Realignment of budget structure so that execution coincides with formulation.
Changes in formulation were brought about by ZBB.
2.
NRR All Other S
+288,000 This is a net amount cd the $+528,000 and a S-240,000 transferred to the Office of Administration (PDA) for training.
In the formulation of the FY 1980 budget the Executive Director for Operations directed that the fund-ing for training, excluding specialized training for inspectors be consoli-dated within the Office of Administration for bett'er management of agency training needs.
3.
IE Fuel Fac. & Mat'l S
+926,000 IE Safeguards S
-300,000 Realignment of budget structure so that Congressional budget program ele-ments coincide with IE programs / organizations.
4 IE All other S
-271,000 This is a net amount of a S-626,000 for realignment of budget structure, a 5-45,000 transferred to the Office of Administration (PDA) for training, and a $+400,000 from unobligated balance carry-over to provide funding for commitments made in FY 1978 for the Revised Inspection Program.
5.
NMSS All other 5
-450,000 This item is for the Nuclear Materials Management and Safeguards ADP system and completes the transfer of all ADP funds which are being consolidated within the Office of Administration.
6.
RES Systems Engineering S +1,500,000 RES All other S-1,500,000 To consolidate the managemert of the seismic research work within the te e
Technology and Engineering program.
7.
PDA All other
$ +1,191,000 The transfer of training funds from NRR (S240,000) and IE (545,000) and the transfer of ADP funds from NMSS ($450,000) to the Office of Adminis-tration.
In addition, S456,000 was provided from unobligated balance carry-over to provide funding for coanitments made in FY 1978 on three contracts that did not get signed until FY 1979.
2209 023
b.
Explanation of chances included in the "Procrammatic Adjustments" Column:
1.
NRR Technical Projects
-154,000 The Appropriation Act added $500,000 to Advanced Reactors for gas work without a compensating increase in the total proaram.
This requires a S500,000 reduction to high priority programs such as Operating Reactors, Safeguards.and Casework. This reduction is being used to fund these high priority programs.
1/ 2/
2.
NRR Advanced Reactors
-320,000-- -
The NRC believes that the Congressional initiative for work on gas reactors can be raet at an Advanced Reactor funding level of. 51,030,000, rather than the level cf $1,350,000 provided by the Appropriation Act. This is based on the current forecast that there will be no HTGR applications submitted for review in either FY 1979 or FY 1980.
These funds are to be used to fund the high priority programs of Operating Reactors, Safeguards and casework. These funds combined with item 1 above will fund these programs at the level requested in the Pmsident's FY 1979 budget.
1/ 2/
3.
NRR All other 5
+2,185,000 In a January 23, 1979 letter to the Committees, the Commission identified 51,060,000 of this increase. The remaining increase is made up of the mentioned in 1. above(and (2) a 5+651,000to fund the high priority activities following two items; 1) a $+474,000 whicn represents the transfer of 15 positions from lower priority areas (PDA-12, RES-3) to decrease the back-100 in operating reactor licensina amendments and to aucment the current staff in~ order to maintain licensing review schedules, primarily operating licenses.
4.
IE Safeguards S
-12'6,000 All other 5
+126,000 These adjustments reflect several minor changes to reflect more precise contract cost estimates.
5.
NMSS Transportation S
-240,000 Low priority effort eliminated so that funds can be used primarily for high priority waste management efforts.
6.
NF.B International Safeguards S
+45,000 For IAEA effort. Offsetting reduction to Safeguard licensing due to reduction in environmental impact statement technical assistance.
2209 024
. 7.
flMSS ALL OTHER 52,688,000M 2/
This, adjustment is the net i.,
ne following items: (1) the transfer from Transportation (S240,000) discussed above, (2) the addition of one position ($43,000) to the spent fuel storage area transferred from PDA, (3) the transfer of $45,000 to International Safeguards, (4) M use of $1,650,000 from unobligated balance carry-over for the Waste Management Program (S650,000 of this amount was included in the Comission's January 23, 1979 letter to the Committees), (5) the reprogranining of
$500,000 from the RES Safeguards program and (6) S300,000 from the R5 System Engineering program.
Since the January 23, 1979 reprogramming request, an additional $2,100K is being reprogrunmed to Waste Management which will allow NMSS to begin studies of domed salt and basalt in two of three principal study areas --
planned for an early FY 1979 start, have been deferred pending additional funds. The increased funding would also allow NMSS to proceed with the effort previously planned. This study was initiated in FY 1979 at a reduced funding level pending receipt of additional funds.
It only considers bedded salt, and we must make further progress in this study before we consider the medias of domed salt and basalt.
V 8.
RES Systems Engineering
$ +1,692,000 This additional funding is needed for the international 3-D program.
The 3-D budget estimates for FY 1979 were prepared in 1977 prior to the discussions of detailed program requirements during meetings with Japanese and German officials in September and November 1977 and in April and June 1978. The reasons for the increased estimates for FY 1979 are the follow-ing:
a.
The scope of the program has been better defined the past year.
The number.of advanccd two-phase flow and level instruments to be provided by NRC for installation in the Gennan and Japanese facilities has increased in the process of developing specific measurement requirements needed to experimentally support code confi nnation.
Part of the increase in instrumentation also re-sulted from the increase in the Japanese slab core test program from one to three cores.
..istrumentation requirements for both the cylindrical core test facility and the PKL test program in-creased.
For example, the number of liquid level detectors needed to follow liquid penetration and accumulation in the JAERI cylindrical core test facility in order to provide me?.surement to support code analysis increased. Turbine metert were added to PKL and a decision was made to insert a number of impedence and film probes into the PKL facility for checkout and developmer.t testing.
b.
The previous preliminary cost estimates for FY 1979 were orepared in mid-1977 prior to the facility designs.
Since September 1977, detailed specifications have been prepared covering the measuremen-2209 025
3-requirements and detailed cost estimates for design, develop-ment and fabrication of the instruments have been prepared by
.LASL, INEL ano ORNL. The more detailed cost estimates have been higher than NRC originally used due to the increased number of instruments discussed above and increased cost estimated by the laboratories for development and fabrication, c.
The need for continuous liaison support by locating resident engir, ers at the German and Japanese facilities became evident during the past year.
Engineers and scientists fluent in Gernan and Japanese along with research and test facility experience are not readily available within the NRC for assignment overseas.
Therefore, contractor employees are to be assigned to those countries. The budget estimates thus had to'be increased to provide for continued funding of contractor liaison support throughout the program.
These funds are being programmed from the LOFT program.
The reduction in the LOFT budget is being accommodated by deferring some work and some fuel procurements from FY 1979 to FY 1980 as shown below, a.
Defer Procurement of Spare Fuel
$2,200,000 b.
Defer Installation of Particlate Filters in Primary Coolant System 300,000 c.
Defer " Hot Spot" Primary System Contamination Study end Installation of Shielding 200,000 d.
Defer Installation of Permanent Off Gas System above Reactor Vessel Head and Other Decontamination Equipment 400,000
$3,100,000 Items b, c, and d pertain to work needed for plant decontamination in the event that fuel were to fail during a test and radioactivity would thereby get into the primary coolant.
No fuel failed in the first nuclear test and it is not expected that there will be fuel failure in the next two nuclear tests.
In the event there are some fuel failures, however, there are temporary measures that can be taken to decontaiminate the plant with-out the equipment above, although additional time would be required.
Item a. refers to deferring the ordering of spare fuel from FY 1979 to FY 1980.
At the present time, there is on site a complete core (Reload Core 1), one spare central contract for two additional central bundles per year.
2209 026
. In FY 1979, our plan is to order one complete core (Reload 2) two additional central bundles and two spare peripheral bundles, all for delivery in FY 1981. The FY 1979 fuel order carries with it the option for ordering additional fuel bundles if we feel they would be needed to meet the test schedule.
Bhsed on the results of the first nuclear test, we believe it will not be necessary to exercise this option in FY 1979~as previously planned.
Instead, we will order Reloead Core 3 plus two central bundles and three bundles in early FY 1980.
9.
RES Code Development
$+330,000 --1/
The Congressional Appropriation Committee's reduction of RES request for FY 1979 resulted in a decrease of $900,000 in the Code Development decision unit.
This reouction has been accommodated by a decrease in planned code testing and applications effort.
It is proposed to reprogram S330,000 into the Code Development program to support work on codes re-quested by NRR for licensing audit calculations. Specifically, the request from NRR in 1979 to develop and apply reactor physics analysis computer programs had not been anticipated in preparing the code develop-ment budget. Ynese funds are being reorogrammed from LOFT.
10 RES Fuel Behavior
$-1,672,000~i/
A fission product transport loop and associated tests are being deferred and research on measuring the transport of fission products from fuel to the containment building will continue at a reduced level of effort pending decision on an appropriate test scale.
This is being accomplished in order to fund high priority activities in Risk Assessment.
1/
11.
RES Primary Systems Integrity S+800,000 The reason for this increase is to meet the needs of NRR user requests for information in the following areas:
o Reaction forces and impingement loads due to two-phase jets o
Dynamic analysis of pipe whip o
Susceptibility of stress corrosion cracking in Onconel-600 tubing o
Corrosion, denting and burst tests of a replaced steam generator o
Tearing instability concept as a criterion for fracture resistance of steels.
2209 027
F
. The requests for these high priority research tasks were all received after the FY 1979 budget was formulated, and it ie necessary to re-program funds from other areas, namely LOFT, to meet these needs.
12.
RES Advanced Convertors S +800,000 This item was included in the Commission's January 23, 1979 letter to the Committees.
1/
13.
RES Safeguards
_1,00n,000 This reduction is being accomplished by deferring 10w priority activities in order to fund the Authorized new initiative in RES for Improved Reactor Safety to commence efforts on research projects in improved safety systems and expanded efforts on the NMSS Waste Management program.
1/
14.
RES Risk Assessment S+1,400,000 --
This additional funding is for new efforts identified after the sub-mission of the FY 1979 budget to Congress to directly support reactor licensing; efforts include the application of quantitative risk assess-ment techniques to categorize according to safety importance standard review plans, generic safety issues, technical specification amendments and exemptions. Also included is risk assessment in support of the review of older plants. These funds are being reprogrammed from the Fuel Behavior activity described above.
15.
RES All Other S-2,030,000 3/
This adjustment is the net of the following items:
(1) the reduction to LOFT of 53,100,000 as described in 8 above; (2) the use of S800,000 (5400,000 from unobligated balance carry-over as described in the Commission's January 23, 1979 letter to the Committees and $400,000 from Safeguards) to fund the Congressional initiative for Improved Reactor Safety; (3) an increase to travel of S70,000 for the international 3-D program, the seismic response effort, piping integrity and in support of NRR generic issues. These programs require additional travel that wasn't contemplated at the time of submission of the FY 1979 President's budget, (4) the transfer of 3 positions to NRR (S130K); (E) an increase to Site Technology and Engineering of $300,000 to initiate work on an NRR research request to study the effects on combining seismic loads with LOCA loads on piping on plant structures (these funds are primarily from Fuel Behavior described abovel, and (6) other minor adjustments amounting to net decrease of S20,000.
2209 028
.- 16.
PDA All Other S -564,0001/2_/
This decrease represents the transfer of 12 positions to flRR and one position to NMSS.
,.1/ Requires Appropriation Comittees Approval.
2/ Requires Authorization Comittees Approval, a
2209 629