ML19340C369
| ML19340C369 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Bailly |
| Issue date: | 11/01/1980 |
| From: | Vollmer R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| References | |
| CON-FIN-B-7505 NRR-81-92, NUDOCS 8011140650 | |
| Download: ML19340C369 (10) | |
Text
REQUEST FOR PROCUREMENT ACTION UCT 8 1980 appg so, sap.st,92 1
Dennis J. Dougherty, Chief MEMCRANOUM FOR:
Technical Assistance Contracts Branch Division of Contracts FROM; Di rector, Division of Engineering (This fann is designed to accos:nodate varying kinds of procurement requests, including small purchases, sole source actions and competitive solicitations.
Inapplicable items or those for which you have not developed information should be left blank.
In such cases, project officer should contact Divi-sten of Contracts' personnel for appropriate guidance.)
,,a T3 e
N f art I - Project Data v1 1.
It is requested that the Division of contracts take th's fo11cwgg action:-
g 3
??
- . ?,
w
/ /
Issue a Request for Proposal (RFP) L g Executa a Modification 2a L_j Issue a RFP to firms awarded Contract No.
Basic Ordering Agreement (type) with riame of Person or Firm t
C Award a contract on the basis of our acceptance of a proposal from in response to an RFP, RFP under d Award a contrai:t on basis a 30A or Interagency Agreement I ^)
of our acceptance of an
@ Award a Sole Source Contract Unsolicited Proposal to Dr. M. T. Davisson Name of Person or Fina O Enter into an Interagency Agreement with:
9'"##
2.
Title of Project and brief description of work:
" Review of Selected Characteristics of Piles for Bailly Nuclear I".
P~Jvides assistance to DE Staff and CCE Reviewers on selected, comclex items in review of pile foundations; Provides expert witness testimeny.
r 801114o 6 TO
4
. If a modification action is ' requested, briefly describe nature of action:
Th,s. level of effort required to peform this work is estimated at 3.
0 year (s) and 2.5 month (s) over a 1
year 11 month period from the effective date of the contract; fran 11/1/80 througn 9/30/82 montn-cay-year montn-cay-year i
4.
The expiration date for receipt of proposals is days after issuance of RFP.
5.
A predroposal' conference is (_j is not G7 contemplated.
6.
Gif No classifled information is anticipated.
/ Classified,information is anticipated. See NRC Forn 187, attached.
/
7.
The Technical Monitor for this requirement is Owen O. ne.,nsen telephone nuncer 492-8186
- the Project Officer is Georce E. Lear 492-8085 telepncne nuriter Part II - Funds t
l 1.
Estimated Cost:
$30,000 Current FY:
(81) $15,000 Second FY:
(82) $15,000 Third FY:
~
Funds Availability: This certifies that funds in the amount of are available for obligation in the current budget or $ 15,000 have been included in this year's bedget
- Availability of funds will be certified at the time the proposal is accepted
4 for the subject work and/or that estimated funds in the amount of 15,000 have been included in next year's budget request for the work (if work is contemplated beycnd this Fiscal Year).
B&R No.:
20-19-04-12 FIN No.:
^3750s Appropriation Symbol:
31X0200201 3ernard L. Grenier y7f Part III - Duplication of Effort 5'iYnTtu're'07*dNUdi@EfNfe'r""
1.
@ I certify that, based on inquiries made with other NRC offices, no unnecessary duplication of effort will result from the cen-duct of the subject work (less than $100,000.00).
2.
L._ / Attached are the certifications executed by each of the members
'o'f the Contract Review Scard (more than $100,000.00).
3.
O Contract Review Soard cartification requests have been forwarded to Soard members for concurrence and/or cor=ents.
Ccmpleted certifications will be for.varded.
Part IV - Attachments
@ Statement of 'Jork (Attachment No. 1
)
O Evaluation criteria and their numerical weights (Attachment No.
)
O List of firms to be invited to submit proposals in addition to general public notification (Attach =ent No.
)
l
4 M Copy of letter designating Source Evaluation Panel members (AttachmentNo.
)
@ Sole Source Justification, if applicable (Attachment No.
)
O Unsolicited Proposal Justification, if applicable. Approval and execution of a contract with.
on
~
fiame of Proposer
~ he basis of an unsolicited proposal is recomended.
(Attachment t
No.
)
y Contract Review Board Certifications (Attachment No.
)
y Special Require.1ents* (Attachment No.
)
Wl 4W C&j Richard H. Vollmer j
Signature of Director (Designating Official)
'This pertains to instructions ' ' cerning schedules, reports, data.
Government-furnished equipmen s other special requirement.
.t.
O Copy of letter designating Source Evaluation Panel members (Attachment No. _
)
@ Sole Source Justification, if appifcable (Attachment No. B
/7 Unsolicited Propesal Justification, if applicable. Approval and execution of a contract with.
on Itame of Proposer the basis of an unsolicited propesal is recomended.
(Attachment No.
)-
/._j Contract Review Board Certifications (Attachment No.
)
T7 Special Requirements * (Attachment No.
)
$P'INEN v A n.-
Signature of Director DISTRIBUTION (Designating Official) central riie /
NRR r/f NRR Contract File (B. Grenier)
Division r/f 3 ranch r/f J. Leonard J. 1.arkins RES P. Ting STD Ccncureas:
"This per:ains to instructions concerning schedules, reports, data, Government-furnished equipment, or othen special requirements.
l m Cr
..s.coqsc..sn T... m :.a... m..GT....bjcsg.as a J;....
.......... n. d....
.rn -e
..o.r w o m..w
- ....x m.'.t...cus1usn unggu...a wr mmor
. m.i.no..:a a.i.aa..w.b.no.non..no..mLe..
mim....
t a
ae
..w.i.no.
Attacnment 1 Statement of Work
Background
A construction permit (CP) for Bailly Nuclear 1 was issued in 1974. A CP extension is new required because construction is only about 1% complete and the 1974 CP has expired.
The plant was required to be suoported on high-capacity, non-displacement piles. The applicant started driving 140 ft. long steel H-piles and experienced difficulties. Supplemental installation methods of pred. rilling and jetting were tried but these methods resulted in conditions unacceptable to the staff. Subsequently, the applicant has proposed to d*ive shorter piles.
This croposal is being subjected to intensive review effort by the staff and its consultants, partly on account of technical proolems associated with ne review of pile foundations, but also on account of streng intervention.
The short pile review effort was undertaken by the staff with assistance from expert consultants (including Dr. M. T. Davisson). When the magnitude of the review became too large for the geotechnical engineering staff to handle, the Corps of Engineers (Detroit District) was contracted to provide crimary review effort with the continuing assistance from the expert consultants.
The review is proceeding in this format and OELD staff has advised the reviewers to prepare for ASL3 hearings and Federal Appeal Court hearings on the acceptability of the sho,rt pile proposal and on the applicant's acolication for a CP extension.
Obfective The objective of this contract is to obtain the assistance of Dr. Davisson in the completion of the Bailly pile foundation review through the ASL3 hearings, the Federal Appeal Court proceedings, and the actual pile installation work.
Work Recuirements Task 1 Jstimated Comoletion Date Estimated level of effort: FY 1981
_5, man-days 30 days after award of contract.
Prepare a recort identifying the significant issues reviewed by the contractor on the Bailly pile founcation from March 25, 1978 to Octooer 31, 1980. The report shall sum-mari:e the contractor's evaluations, con-clusions and recannendations made regarding these items, including the bases for these evaluations, conclusions and recommendations.
Tne report shall sumari:e the calculations performed and shall identify the literature references and any other bases used in the evaluations. The report shall also contain a status of the items recuiring further review.
Task I shall be completed before Task 2 is started.
O
. Task 2 Estimated Comoletion Date Estimated level of effort: FY 1981 10 man-days Witnin 30 days of request FY 1982 3 man-days Evaluate the behavior of pile groues, the long tem performance of tha proposed foundation and its benavior under extreme envircrvnental conditions, the CA/QC for the pile installation, and other items requiring further review. This assistance snall include attendance at meetings with the staff, other consultants, and the applicant, as directed by the oroject officer, Also, as necessary, perfo m analyses, and make visits to the site to observe the pile driving operations. Upon completion of significant milestones, as identified Dy the project officer, provide updates of the report submitted under task 1.
It is estimatec*tnat four reports will be required. The content of these reports shall be as specified in task 1.
Task 3 Estimated level of effort: FY 1981 15 man-days As raquired to supplement FY 1982 H man-days previously crepared reports and as needed to support Prepare written tastimony and provide expert licensing activities, witnessin'g at the ACRS meetings, ASLB hearings and Federal Apoeal Court proceedings, as required to fulfill licensing objectives.
Level of Effort and Period of PeMomance The level of effort is estimated at 50 man-days over a two year period of performance.
~
Recorting Recuirements 1.
The report requested under task 1 shall be provided to the project officer with copies to J. P. Knight, L. Heller and O. Thompson of the Division of Engineering.
2.
The uodated reports requested under task 2 shall be provided to the project officer, with copies to J. P. Knight, L. Heller and O. Thomoson.
3.
The written testimony prepared under task 3 shall be submitted to the project officer with copies to L. Heller and O. Thomosan.
Note: All data, calculations, grapns, plots, computer r ', etc, developed exclusively unoer this contract become the property of the NRC L 'd will ce delivered to the NRC by tne contractor.
o 4
A business letter report shall be submitted along with the billing voucher to the project officer with copies to J. P. Knignt DE, and 3. L. Grenier, NRR, and the contracting officer, DC. These recorts will contain:
A summary of the efforts completed during the period; The amcunt of funds expended for manpower, computer services and travel during the period and cumulative to date; Any problems or delays encountered or anticipated.
Meetings and Travel The contractor should plan and budget for ne following meetings and travel:
2 one-day meetings in Bethesda 12 one-day visits to the Bailly Nuclear Plant Site in Porter County, Indiana 3 one-day ACRS meetings or ASL3 hearings in Porter County, Indiana Three days at Federal Court proceedings in Washington, D.C.
NRC Furnished Materials, Licensee submittals required for review of the proposed pile foundation will be furnished under separate cover by the project officer.
e
ATTAC*-IMENT 2 SOLE SOURCE JUS IFICATION Dr. M. T. Davisson REVIEW DF SELECTED CHARACTERISTICS OF DILES AT 3AILLY NUCLEAR I /DOST-Cpl As a post - CP design change to the Sailly application, a snort pile foundation is proposed to replace the long pile foundation. The main basis for the short pile design is a paper written in 1975 by Dr. Davisson. The best interpretation of Dr. Davisson's paper for application to the design of the Sailly piles can be supplied by Dr. Davisson because only he knows the limitations of the soil and pile conditions for wnich his infonnation and research studies are valid.
If another source (person) were asked to perform the work statement, he would have to confinn the validity of Dr. Davisson's caper before proceeding to the evaluation of the proposed oile foundation. Therefore, the use of Dr. Davisson as a sole source for this work is :nos: efficicnt and in the interest of a best evidence deter-nination.
In addition to Dr. Davisson's speciali:ed capabilities as evidenced by his 1975 pacer, he has written numerous other papers on piling and he is a nationally recogni:ed expert in piling. For example, Dr. Davisson was selected as one of ten experts to canel the U.S. Depart:nent of Transportation Pile Prediction Symposium,1980.
Dr. Davisson has previously provided consulting services to NRC under Contracts NRC-03-78-166 and NRC-03-79-157 wherein he provided expertise on complex areas of tne short pile review effort.
The review of the short pile proposal is not complete, primarily because tnent are complex tecnnical issues which can only be resolvec during and after the driving of piles. Thus, the continued expert technical services of Dr. Davisson are needed for the review of these complex technical issues. Dr. Davisson's unique capabilities in this regard are discussed above.
In addition to Dr. Davisson's unique technical qualifications regarding tne Bailly piles, he is also the most cost-effective NRC. source for the required expertise because of nis intimate knowledge of the project; Dr. Davisson has been associated with the Bailly project during essentially all of the staff review of tne current snart pile proposal.
The importance of Dr. Davisson's national reputation is also significant in the censideration of a sole source. In this regard, Dr. Davisson will provide a valuable contribution in tne strongly contested licensing proceedings for the Bailly plant.
i l
l
i e
\\ At this time the staff would be unable to proceed effectively in the licensing process without the services of Dr. Davissen because he is needed to:
a) sucoort in meetings, hearings anc court proceedings his evaluations made during previous review efforts.
b) provide review assistance for the complex technical issues yet to be resolved by the staff and for wnich he nas unique tecnnical capabilities.
c) support in meetings, hearing and cou, proceedings his evaluations and recommendations to be made in the on-going review effort.
e 4
e e
9
(
9