ML19308B690
| ML19308B690 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 08/06/1976 |
| From: | Chilk S NRC OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY (SECY) |
| To: | Gossick L NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO) |
| References | |
| TASK-TF, TASK-TMR NUDOCS 8001160731 | |
| Download: ML19308B690 (1) | |
Text
M,9
- 7 \\Di
) \\
Li. ? (
r Y, b neo
^N* w
^
UNITED STATES Nw, LEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION f
g CASHINGTEN, D. C. 20555 i
5 l
\\*...*/
OFFICE OF THE Y
SFORETARY August 6,1976 (as revised)
MEMORANDUM FOR: Lee V. Gossick, Executive Director for Operations FROM:
Samuel J. Chilk, Secreti t}d V
(
STAFF REQUIREMENTS - BRLIFJ.I G ON ECC-BYPASS CONCEPTUAL
SUBJECT:
DESIGN APPROVAL,12:15 P.M, FRIDAY, JULY 23, 1976, COMMISSIONERS' CONFERENCE ROOM, D. C. 0FFICE The Commission approved the proposal to proceed with the initial development of the conceptual design, and cost and schedule astimates for the ECC-Bypass Project, subject to the following prior steps:
1.
providing the staff of the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy and the House and Senate Appropriations Committees with brief-ings and follow-on letters on the details of proceeding with the conceptual design phase.
The follow-on letters will be cleared with the Comission prior to dispatch; 2.
informing the Office of Management and Budget.
(By memorandum dated July 30, 1976, staff informed the Commission that the contacts requested in items 1 & 2 above had been complete _d.
Follow-on letters to the Committees were dispatched on August 2,1976).
The Comission also approved proceeding with the understanding that no decision will be made relative to location, desian or construction of the action facility, beyond the conceptual design, until:
(1) the options for location and management arrancements for the jesign and construction have been reviewed anc decisions reached by the Commission. (RES) (SECY Suspense: October 15, 1976)
(2) the results of the conceptual design study are presented i _to the Commission.
(RES).(SECY Suspense: October 15. 1976) l, The Commission requested:
l 1.
information concerning the advantages and disadvantages of direct contracting for NRC research projects as opposed to the current l
. procedure of contracting indirectly through ERDA.
(RES) (SECY Suspense: September 15,1976) _
ONTACT:
i
.B. Mc0sker (SECY) 34-1410 '
3~.,
- Pevisions shown by undersooring i
g!rq goonso731,
~
~
.-