ML20009B238
| ML20009B238 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 06/30/1981 |
| From: | Dunbar P MARYLAND, STATE OF |
| To: | Weis B Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8107150140 | |
| Download: ML20009B238 (12) | |
Text
.. -.
x 6~O-32 O l
BUREAU OF MINES JAMES B. COULTER ENERGY OFFICE secarta==
POWER PLANT SITING PROGRAM STATE OF MARYLAND DEPARTMENT OF N ATUR AL RESOURCES ENERGY ADMINISTRATION TAWES STATE OFFICE BUILDING ANNAPOLIS 21401 (301) 269-2261 d
A June 30, 1981 t' euT/yg k{ gdlII, j 'I /Sgg Bretta Applebaum Weis k,%
TMI Program Office Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555
'6 N
Dear Ms. Applebaum Weiss:
Enclosed is a copy of our recent RFP regarding socio-economic impact of TMI discharge.
Any comments would be greatly appreciated.
Very truly yours, Peter M. Dunbar, Ph.D., PE Power Plant Siting Program PMD/rl S
O 6i \\
8107150140 810630 A
PDR ADOCK 05000320 P
B
- j. '
\\
J_y.
- ..e. O ' r BUREAU OF MINES JAMES B COULTER ENERGY OFFICE srsar'ame POW ER PLANT SITING PROGRAM STATE OF MARYLAND DEPARTMENT OF N ATURAL RESOURCES ENERGY ADMINISTRATION TAWES STATE OFFICE BUILDING ANNAPOUS 21401 (301) 269-2261 June 28, 1981
Dear Prospective Bidder:
This letter constitutes a formal request for proposals for the Mary-land Power Plant Siting Program. Requested are bids to assess the poten-tial for any adverse socioeconcmic impacts associated with the release of the processed waste water resulting from the March 1979 accident at Three Mile Island nuclear station, given that there are no adverse radioeco-logical or health consequences.
Proposals will be evaluated on the basis of vendor's ability to design and perform such a study and the associated cost.
All information con-sidered to be proprietary and for which confidentiality is desired should be clearly labeled as such by the bidder. The State of Maryland reserves the right to reject any and all responses received by reason of this re-quest without cost or obligation.
Contractors whose proposals are not accepted will be so notified in writing.
Ten (10) copies of the proposal must be received at the issuing office by August 31, 1981. Proposals are not restricted to institutions in Maryland. Any proposals or amendments thereto received after the closing date will not be considered.
Maryland is an equal opportunity enployer.
i Ve truly yours,
{
[f f (
\\
Yh*
Peter M. Dunbar, Ph.D., PE e
Power Plant Siting Program PMD:ph
State of Maryland Department of Natural Resources Power Plant Siting Program Request for Proposals (RFP)
Contract,to the Power Plant Siting Program for Technical Assistance Risk Assessment of the Socio Economic Impact on The Chesapeake Bay Fisheries Industry By A Discharge of Processed Waste Water From 'IMI Into The Susquehhnna River Starting Date:
(On or about) Novenber 1,1981 9
Duration of Contract: One year
________m_
TABLE OF CONTENTS
(
4 SECTION I
Introduction i
SECTION II General Contractual Requirenents SECTICN III Scope of Work SECTION IV Evaluation Criteria SECTION V
Financial Proposal l
t
(
~
' Y**
I P
. _.. _ - - ~.
1 SECTION I.
INTRODUCTION 1
A.
Obiective The State of Maryland plans to acquire the services of a con-tractor to provide an assessment of the socioeconomic impact on the Chesapeake Bay Fisheries Industry by a discharge of processed TMI waste water into the Susquehanna River.
B.
Issuino Office Peter M. Dunbar Power Plant Siting Program Tawes State Office Building (B-3)
Annapolis, Maryland 21401 Phone:
(301) 269-2261 The sole point of contact in the State for purposes of this re-quest is the Issuing Office.
C.
Addendum and Suoolement to Reauest If it becomes necessary to revise any part of this request or if additional data is necessary to enable the exact interpretation of provisions of this request, revisions will be sent to all Vendors receiving the initial RFP.
D.
Closino_ Date Ten (10) copies of your statement of qualification must be re-ceived by the program office by August 31, 1981. Responses or un-solicited amendments to statements of qualifications received after the closing date will not be considered.
E.
Bidders Meetino A meeting to discuss the RFP and the scope of study will be held at the Tawes State Office Building in Conference Room D-4 at 9 a.m. on July 27, 1981.
F.
Acceotance The State reserves the right to accept or to reject any and all submitted proposals and to negotiate separately, in any manner necessary, to serve the best interest of the State of Maryland.
Vendors whose proposals are not accepted will be notified in writing.
G.
Incurre_ Exoensqa The State will not be responsible for any expenses incurred by a contractor in preparing and submitting a proposal.
H.
Oral Presentations Vendors who submit a proposal may be required to make an oral presentation to the Issuing Office. 'Ibe Issuing Office will schedule the time and location for the presentation.
I.
Evaluation Comittee Members of the Issuing Office and others will review all pro-posals and make recomendations for the selection of the Vendor to supply the consulting services specified in this RFP. Contract awards if any, are subject to appropriate State approvals.
J.
Duration of Procosal Offer The offering vendor must state the period for which the preposal will remain valid.
Such period may be extended by mutual written agreement.
~
l 9
\\
O SECTIOS JI. GENERAL (DNTRACIUAL REQUIREMENTS A.
Comoliance with Maryland Law BeforO a corporation can do business with the State of Maryland, it must be registered with the Department of Assessments and Taxa-tion, State Office Building, Room 803, 101 West Preston Street, Balti-more, Maryland 21201. Prior registrati a is not required for partici-pation in the selection process.
B.
Termination / Cancellation The failure of the General Assembly of Maryland to appropriate funds in any future fiscal year for any contract resulting from this RFP will entitle the State to terminate the contract at the beginning of the fiscal year in which no funds have been appropriated for such contract.
C.
Financial Soundness The vendor must be financially sound and well managed. A certi-fled annual report or statenent of financial condition must be sub-mitted with your statenent.
D.
Eaual Oooortunity Any contract (s) resulting from this request must contain appro-priate provisions against discrimination by the contractor (s) in employment and sub-contracting.
E.
Contractor Responsibilities The State will enter into contractual agreement with the offering vendors only.
The offering vendors shall be responsible for all equipment and services as required by this RFP. Sub-contractors, if any, must be identified and complete description of their role rela-tive to the proposal nust be included.
F.
Governing Laws Any contract resulting from this RFP shall be governed by the laws of the State of Maryland.
G.
Tvoe of Contract Any contract resulting from this RFP shall be a standard research contract of which copies are available for review upon request.
This contract includes statements of liabilty and idemnification.
O l
1 3CTIOi III SCOPE OP WWK (bjective In March of 1981 the Nuclear Regulatory Commission issued the Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statcment regarding the cleanup of 'Ihree Mile Island. Among the options for the disposal of processed accident water considered in that statement is the discharge to the Susquehanna River.
It is desirable that the Maryland Power Plant Siting Program (MPPSP) evaluate the potential of such a processed water discharge to adversely effect the consumption of Chesapeake Bay seafood products and to describe the nature of su6h effects. Maryland's intentions in performing such a study are to independently develop information to supplement and comple-ment information expected to be developed by the Nuclear Regulatory Com-mission (NRC). Consequently, this study will serve as partial background to the formulation of the State's position with respect to participation in any NRC decision making process.
Program Office Description The Power Plant Siting program was established in 1971 to insure that demands for electric power will be met in a timely manner at reasonable cost while assuring that the natural environment is protected. The scope of the Program extends to predicting the impact of propcsed new generating and transmission facilities, essessing the impact of ex. sting generating
(
facilities, acquiring rsitable sites to be used for needed future gener-I ation, and investigating information gaps through a long-range research I
program. With the exception of radiological studies, the majority of work is performed by pt:ysical and biological scientists working for PPSP on a contractual basis. We work is administered by PPSP staff, who integrate results into the various decision processes concerning siting and impact questions.
Radiological analysis is performed by Power Plant Siting staff metre-bers.
'Ihese individuals have been actively involved in conment ar.d tech-nical monitoring since the March 1979 event at Three Mile Island.
Specif-ic data has been and will continue to be generated independent of other agencies and utility groups.
Background
The TMI accident generated approximately 1.5 million gallons of con-taminated water. About 50% of this water has been processed via the Epi-cor II system and is stored on site. Pending NRC approval, the remaining water will be processed by the submerged demineralizer system (SDS) and also stored on site.
Processing is expected to reduce all radionuclide concentrations to trace levels except tritium. Tritium cannot be removed with such methods. The total tritium inventcry on site will be approxi-mately 4000 Ci. Wrough its own sampling and analysis capabilities the program office has verified the radionuclide concentrations present in the Epicor II processed water inventory.Similar independent verification will be applied to SDS processed water. Based upon these measurements and
our assessment of radiological impact associated with the discharge of greater quantities of radionuclides from normally operating reactors (pre-accident TMI, Peach Bottom, Calvert Cliffs) relative to fallout and background radioactivity,the office has concluded that there are no ad-verse rodioecological or health impacts to the residents of Maryland or to biota in the Bay should the processed water be discharged into the Susque-hanna River.
This office is concerned that the public react h n to the discharge option could adversely impact the econmic structure and.ontinued via-bility of Bay fishery industries as a result of consumer avoidance. This possibility is mentioned in the NRC's Final Programmatic Environmental Impcct Statment.
It is expected that the NRC will perform comprehensive studies of the socioemomic impacts-of the various. discharge options. The State is not interem ed in duplicating those studies, but desires to develope information regarding socioeconomic risk to serve as background to the formulation of its position with respect to participation in any future NRC decision making process.
Requirements In general the requirement of this office is that the vendor design and implaaent a study to assess the potential socioeconomic impacts on Maryland associated with a discharge of processed 'IMI accident water into the Susquehanna River.
The approach to this problem must be clearly stated and the capability to implment and corplete any such study nust be indicated.
General Vendor Requirements The successful verdor will exhibit a capability to acquire an in depth understanding of the somewhat unique nature of the Chesapeake Bay Fishery industry, the nature of sployment as a Bay Waterman, and the community-econmic interlacing which exists. The vendor must be able to understand the nature of the product market and the extent of competition from other regions. Recreational activities such as hunting, fishing, and pleasure boating should also be considered.
The vendor must be able to research the historical record to ascertain events which resulted in consumer avoidance or, on the other hand, events in which an expected consu:'er avoidance did not materialize. It is re-cognized that no one past event is entirely similar to the situation at hand; however, the vendor must be able to evaluate various aspects of other events which could provide indications as to what could be the case with a discharge from 'IMI.
The vendor muct be able to evaluate the various public arguments re-lating to the discharge option in terms of any impact they may have upon the potential of an avoidance reaction. This evaluation must include an understanding of the current and projected role which the media and offi-cial statacnts could play in influencing public opinion.
Scone of Work' The following task definitions represent the desired approach to this problem. Although these tasks are felt to be essential in addressing the issue at hand, the vendor may go beyond these points in their response to this RFP and identify other important issues / approaches in a risk assess-ment of this nature.
Background
Task 1: In conjunction with the program office and Tidewater Fish-eries Administration the general nature of the resource at risk must be described. This includes the nature of the Chesapeake Bay Fishery indus-try, the types and relative importance of the markets which the industry serves, the extent of competition which exists from other re' ions and markets, and the nature d the community / industry relationships which exist.
Task 2: Economically important recreational industries should be identified as they relate to a resource at risk.
Approach Task 3: The historical record must be searched in order to ascertain events which resulted in consumer avoidance or, on the other hand, events in which an expected consumer avoidance did not materialize. %e search p
should not be limited-to events which relate to fisheries industries.
Task 4: The events identified in Task 3 must be critiqued as to the historical elements which are in sane way analogous to the situation at hand.
Conclusions Task 5: Based upon the results of Tasks 3 and 4, the potential that a consumer avoidance of Chesapeake Bay Seafood products or recreational activities would oocur as a result of a discharge of processed 'IMI acci-dent water into the Chesapeake Bay must be evaluated.
Task 6: Based upon all the preceding tasks, conclusions must be made as to the likelihood that a consumer avoidance reaction could adversely affect the economics of the Bay related industries. W e critical compo-nents of the industry which would be impacted should be identified.
Task 7: The nature of the economic impact ruust be described. 'Ihis includes description as to who would be impacted, how long such an impact would occur, and how any impacts depend upon the length of any reaction.
Task 8: An evaluation must be made as to the continued viability of the industry in terms of nature of long term impacts and its dependence upon the length and severity of any reaction.
Caveat Developnent Task 9: Lastly, an evaluation must be made as to dependence of the above conclusions upon media coverage, the influence of public officials and opinion makers, and other factors.
t 9
l l
l P
q SECTION IV - EVALUATION CRITERIA
- Has the vendor demonstrated a capability to design and implenent study program of this nature.
- Does the vendor possess a knowledge of the Gesapeake Bay Region, and the regional elements essential to this study.
- Ilas the vendor demonstrated a clear understanding of the scope of the technical assistance required.
- Do the projebt team members possess sufficient experience, skills and education and are the skills of the team members ccrapatible and ccanplimentary.
- Is the proposed approach reasonable and likely to produce useful information.
- Are contractual milestones identified and do these milestones represent a reasonable schedule.
SEC1' ION V - FINANCIAL PROPOSAL The finanical proposal shall be separate frcxn the technical proposal.
Where subcontractors are involved, information should be supplied at the same level of detail as the prime contractor. Contracts are written on a cost plus fixed fee with maxuaum ceiling basis.
The detail to be included is as follows:
- Total Salaries and Wages
- Travel
- Materials (including rentals)
- Indirect Costs (Define)
- Fee
- Overhead
- Total Costs P
l e
e
, f