ML20035D903
| ML20035D903 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 03/11/1992 |
| From: | Schofer H NRC ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON NUCLEAR WASTE (ACNW), Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards |
| To: | Fraley R Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20035D884 | List: |
| References | |
| ACRS-2812, NACNUCLE, NUDOCS 9304140101 | |
| Download: ML20035D903 (21) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:. j e g5 "'%9 UNITED STATES 4 ~ %, NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION eO" i ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON REACTOR SAFEGUARDS o j j ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON NUCl EAR WASTE 2 WASHINGTON,D.C. 20665 i %,....f March 11, 1992 OFFICE OF ACRS/ACNW MEMORANDUM FOR: Raymond F. Fraley, Executive Director hchofer, Chief FROM: H. Stan Technica'l Information Branch
SUBJECT:
BBS USERS The ACRS/ACNW Bulletin Board System is in its eighth year of operation under its present configuration (Milnet and MCI Mail were tested prior to the installation of TCOMM). As of this date, there are 59 preregistered users that have access to the BBS. These users are assigned to one of two groups, ACRS/ACNW Group or Open Group. The ACRS/ACNW Group users include Committee members, Committee consultants, and Committee staff. The Open Group users include NRC staff and representatives of other federal agencies with specific connections with either Committee. Preregistered users are immediately placed into their respective group when they call in and successfully provide their names and passwords. The BBS is closed to all other callers. The BBS may store sensitive unclassified bulletins, messages or files that contain advice, recommendations or opinions that are part of the deliberative, consultative, and decisionmaking processes of a Federal Advisory Committee. Members of the Open Group cannot have access to bulletins, messages or files that reside in the ACRS/ACNW Group and are publicly available to the ACRS/ACNW Group members. However, members of the ACRS/ACNW Group can have access to the public bulletins, messages, or files in the Open Group. t + Traditionally, we have been using the following criteria for granting access to the BBS. As you recommended, the ACRS Planning and Procedures Subcommittee may want to review these criteria for possible endorsement during its next meeting. Enclosed is a list of the present BBS users with their Group assignments. ACRS/ACNW Grouc Active members of Committees e Authorized consultants to Committees e e ACRS/ACIN staff and fellows ATTACHMENT C 9304140101 920531 PDR-ACRS 2812 PDR
t 4 Open Groun NRC Commissioners and staff e Employees of the federal, state, or local government with e a need to interact with committee members, staff or fellows e Persons who have Committee business to conduct with Committee members and who are sponsored by a Committee member.
Enclosure:
List of ACRS/ACNW BBS Users cc: Mabel Lee Richard Savio Ethel Barnard i
i 43 F Y f *f C 3 - 1 N A LD f 7 uxArT 1: 4/1/92 2:~4 p. m '. SAVIO/ ruby SAVIO 2: Program C Programmatic subactivity eliminated because task is completed. Conversion from Provisional Operating License to Full Term Operating Licensee for one plant. This activity will be conducted during FY 1992 ???. (Program Guidance ) License applications for commercial uranium enrichment facilities submitted to the NRC. This subactivity will be performed, as requested by the Commission during FY 10_ -19_). (Program Guidance .) g The following listed programmatic subactivity items were elipinated because the task is included in another listed programmatic activity item. Fire protection provisions and related matters for existing and future nuclear power plants. (Program Guidance ) Performance of motor operated, check, and solenoid operated valves. This subactivity will be performed during FY 19 -19 (Program Guidance ) Issues associated with the quantification of seismic risk. (Program Guidance ) ATTACHMENT 3
t I I 2 Matters related to the application of improved source term methodology to evolutionary and advanced LWRs. (Program Guidance ) g[> New programmatic subactivity items. Technical policy issues related to the licensing of evolutionary, passive, and advanced reactors. This activity will include both issues identified by the NRC staff and issues identified indepen-dently by the Committee. (Program Guidance ) f Research programs fcr the AP600, SBWR, and other advanced reactor designs proposed by DOE or by the industry. (Program Guidance ) t Policy and implementation issues associated with the use of DACs and ITAACs. (Program Guidance ) Regulatory guides needed to support the 10 CFR Part 52 regulations j (e.g., the use of a PRA and evaluation of severe accidents to meet I a performance avaluation). (Program Guidance ) Analysis used to support licensing positions for standard reactor design applications (e.g., thermal hydraulic code-analyses). (Program Guidance ) f> /0
s 'a f 3 Matters related to the use of probabilistic risk assess.raent in the regulatory decision making process. (Program Guidance ) Revised siting requirements related to the decoupling of siting from source term and the use of the approved source term. (Program guidance } r Matters related to the development of performance based regulation. (Program Guidance ) i w tac & 't wen) % n aa t 4 u a An 4 h- ~C xq.n eA& h a b + h g,S g h fj w' eky Ul }" g p nas m.A~- An ~4 ^ n f._ 4 ~ u my M~L %nd go. @W y/ 4 D//
... ~. 't l-j t i i i i F l ATTACHMEITT E DELETION i FOIA EX(b) (5) s S ? i 2 - 6 l' 6 } i 'f 6/a-fa6 l
2-- 4- + t DRAFT 8:4/1/92:11:20 a.m. SAVIO/ ruby FTE Planned Use of Additional FTEs Recuest for Additional FTEs for the Fellowship Procram We are currently in the process of submitting a request for unbudgeted" requirements (positions beyond our approved resourc-i es). As background I have attached my December 11, 1991 memorandum to the members of the Planning and Procedures Subcommittee which I issued as my followup to the discussions which took place during the November 22-24, 1991 ACRS Ad Hoc Subcommittee meeting in Baltimore, Maryland (see Enclosure 1). The memorandum proposes that we request (for FY 93) 3 additional FTEs for the ACRS Fellowship Program and describes generally how these additional resources would be used. In view of the NRC current budget situation it does not appear to us to be realistic to reques t 3 FTE I for FY 93. If the Committee agrees we will submit a request for 2 FTE in FY 93 and 1 additional FTE for the following years of FY 94-97. Our best estimate is that we will exceed of FTE ceiling for FY 92 (38 FTE) by about 1 1/2 FTE. The Commission will be the approving authority on our request for additional resources. 1 The ACRS/ACIM has held resources steady at 38 FTEs and approximate- 't ly $380,000 in program support funds since 1988. There was an attempt in 1989 to request more resources primarily for technical and administrative support of the ACIN (see attached memo to Ronald Scroggins, Controller, dated april 24, 1989, from Mabel Lee). As you may have surmised, this request was denied. ATTACHME*lT F
o 'o 2 For discussion purposes what follows will be in more detail than the supporting rationale in the April 24, 1989 memorandum and not in budget format. We can make this conversion when we have settled on what we will say. I have not split the requested 3 FTEs (2 in FY 93 and 1 additional in FY 94) among additional tasks which I describe in the text. The table in my December 11, 1991 memorandum t would be what I would use as a guide in doing this. The ACRS Fellowship program was established by Section 6 of Public Law 95-209, 91 Stat. 1483 which was the NRC Authorization Act for i fiscal year 1978. This provision was not enacted as an amendment to the Atomic Energy Act but was codified in 2 U.S.C. 2040. The program was established to facilitate the ACRS independent evaluation of reactor safety issues and to help avoid unnecessary delays in the regulatory review process. The ACRS Fellowship Program was initially staffed at a level of 15 FTE. The program is currently allocated 2.5 FTE to accommodate the budget constraints under which this office operates. We are planning to request an additional 2 FTE for this program during FY 1993 and 1 more FTE during FY 1994. The Fellowship program was designed to assist the ACRS in its task by providing a cadre of individuals capable of performing specialized technical evaluations which can be used in the ACRS' review and decision making process. The present intent and focus of the program is to provide expertise in areas of new technological developments and broad based perspectives not necessarily developed within the NRC regulatory process. The f-27
t j 3 Fellowship program has also been used to provide information for the ACRS members in selected areas and thereby avoid the resource intensive process of providing NRC staff information briefings to the ACRS or its subcommittees. The individuals in the Fellowship program have been recruited outside of the NRC staff to bring in outside knowledge and viewpoints and 2-year term appointments have been used. This provides a mechanism for hiring staff members whose skills (such as in some areas of advanced technologies) are needed by the ACRS for only a limited period of time. i The rationale for an increase in this program are the expanded requests from the Commission and the ACRS demand for more in-depth reviews of licensing issues and new areas of technological development. The request for an additional 3 FTE is to provide resources to accomplish the following tasks. Without these resources, we will not be able to accomplish these tasks. 1. Increased technical support for the ACRS review of evolution-ary and passive LWRs. i The ACRS, consistent with Commission directives, is reviewing issues associated with the licensing of evolutionary and passive LWRs. These designs utilize modern technologies for which the expertise available within the NRC staff is limited. To provide the support necessary for ACRS review of these I l matters will require additional ACRS Fellows with specific l fkN
p I_ ////[j<g~..% a^ t' IMAGE EVALUATION s[g ' g 'M TEST TARGET (MT-3) 'gf gy /g, %o# qje tg y do g<V l.0 ?22 ci:2.0 l,l 1:iL=== y ta = 1.25 l 1.4 N 1.6
- =--
t-==
150mm 4__.---
6"
'4 # 4%
e w
,, fr
. q\\
777/x
%:?2
T
- n...
\\\\\\\\\\[g / j ..S ..x IMAGE EVALUATION ra \\g 8b" TEST TARGET (MT-3) / 4% ll s, ,gl ~ xy Q$9 s('9 bh${ 'R kV ? ~~ 1.0 'r22 =. 9..,=2 j,l = EES "Il.25 ' l.4 1:!! 1.6 I i, lin__ 4 -- - 150mm - 4 _. 6" 4xs Pih ,6p (/phb g' 4} 46 w;<n,y,p,}f .g.&x s "4 4 O e j f. O / / y N-' ..h ,f ^,,,. h, gF
++ /lo w '4, ~ % v / IMAGE EVALUATION f/ \\;/g/ if' TEST TARGET (MT-3) 49 / fry /gh;$' %g ? 4' l.0 R22 r. ___ h_h.. - j,l s ts w= 1.25 10 I.4 I!q I.6 W tih== 2 4 150mm 6" n sy +,A l ~l - f//AN gf f l ,I,~ W g g e n. %.y 6 e, is g-qq o, ,p .l c ~~T s n. - x w a:a Obl .,,( n
d I h //g / '6 IMAGE EVALUATION w \\[Q// 2', TEST TARGET (MT-3) p'k f '*\\'((f/ 4Q(c Q v 1.0 ,' 2 2 = - _ - - !D 2 0 j,l tsen:_ IIll! l.8 IMz=ex [ ! ---1.25f 1.4 !!! lb.6 ii== l!Omm 4 6" g._____________._.-_ ly ~ Nci 4p$ gz% x ,,\\,3'7 s /////x\\ +\\ O sw /c y o t y y c; $ j ^'N r /
- w,
,,.- j lt y'f
t,; : o. 4 comparable expertise to provide independent technical support to the ACRS in the following areas. (n) Independent evaluations by the ACRS staff of selected complex plant system designs - These evaluations will be used by the Committee to judge the adequacy of the Part 52 review procedures and the applicants submittals and the capability of these systems to perform intended functions. (b) An increased level of technical support for the review of technical policy issues that go beyond current regulatory requirements identified by the NRC staff for consider-ation by the Commission - The Commission has requested that the ACRS review these issues. (c)- Independent evaluations by the ACRS staff of' selected areas of PRAs submitted in support of design certifica-tions for evolutionary and passive LWRs. (d) Independent technical evaluations of issues associated with the test programs and test facilities required for i-AP600 and SBWR design certification. 2. Acceleration of the development and use of advanced engineer-ing workstation capability. ~ ? -{;5l , \\l c 8
e 2 5 l-Consistent with the recent NRC initiative to develop and use advanced engineering workstations, we have recently acquired a Sun SPARCstation 2, UNIX-based micro-computer. We will, within our current resource limitations, have software in-stalled on the system and maintained by our office users. We currently have a Fellow who is highly qualified in the use of PRA codes but do not have a Fellow with comparable experience in the use of thermal hydraulics codes. We plan to have our micro-computer system operational by the end of April 1992 and to have the capability to do perform limited systems analysis using RELAP by the end of June 1992. Within our current FTE ceiling, we will not be able to have a staff person who has experience with the use of RELAP or other thermal hydraulic codes. Under these constraints, we would only be able to p: ovide a minimal level of support to the Committee's review of the proposed test prmirams for the AP600 and SBWR as described in 1(d). The designated portion of the requested additional resources would allow an adequate level of support. 3. Increased Technical Support for ACRS-initiated work. The ACRS in its capacity as an independent advisory committee undertakes self-initiated work in support of Commission objectives. Examples are the Committee's work on (1) the development of containment development of containment design criteria to accommodate severe accidents, (2) the identifica-FJo o
6 i tion and the development of resolutions for key technical i issues associated with advanced reactors, and (3) safety goal l policy i=plementation. This work must often be accomplished without the kind of technical support normally provided by the NRC staff. Increased fellowship support could assist such efforts by the development of background information, particu-larly the historical basis for applicable regulatory posi-l tions, conduct of literature searches, analysis of problems that the NRC staff may not consider, and the like. l 4. Increased use of independent technical evaluations performed i by the ACRS Fellows. i i r As previously stated the ACRS Fellowship progran was estab-lished to fz.cilitate the ACRS independent evaluation of reactor safety issues. The current level of 2.5 FTEs allows i only a minimal level of support to Committee activities involving (1) the use of advanced technology on reactor plant I designs, (2) the applications of probabilistic risk assess-i ment, (3) thermal hydraulic systems analysis, (4) the evalua-r tion of insights gained from operating experience, (5) the i development of performance based regulations, and (6) the i review of the insights gained from PRAs submitted as part of the IPE and IPEE. The additional resources requested would support expanded ACRS efforts in these areas and the comple-tion of the planned ACRS work on a more timely basis. d a e
- i,.. m cg['o I
g( UNIT E D ST AT ES 'c, NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION E ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON REACTOR SAFEGUARDS O W ASHINGTON. D. C. 20555 %..... +C December 11, 1991 MEMORANDUM FOR: Members, Planning and Procedures Subcommittee FROM: Dick Savio [seI rq
SUBJECT:
USE OF ACRS FELLOWS During the November 22-24, 1991 ACRS Ad Hoc Subcommittee meeting the members asked that an effort be made to expand the ACRS Fellows program. The attached material describes what our current thinking is. We are planning, if you agree, to request an additional 3 FTEs for the 1993 Budget Year (starting October 1992) to be used for expanding the ACRS Fellowship program. We vill probably also request an additional 1 FTE for providing Fellowship-type support for the ACNW. We will discuss this further with you during the December 11, 1991 Planning and Procedures Subcommittee meeting.
Attachment:
As stat'ed ~. b.
USE OF ACRS FELLOWS ) 3.0 FTEs currently used plus 3.0 FTEs Budgeted l "Wish List" an additional currently 1.5 FTE l level FTE 3.0 FTE used level Danign 2.0 1.0 .5 .5 Cortification License .5 .5 None None Renswal PRA Utilization 2.0 1.5 1.0 .5 Planning .5 .5 .25 None In-depth 1.0 .5 None None eupport on cpacial projects Gentral technical 3.0 1.5 .75 .5 n=sistance not 'icred by items re '5dmin. and tech- -1. 0 .5 .5 None nical oversight for co-ops, etc. I (Uso 1 Fellows FTE for every 4 ctudents FTE TOTAL 10.0 6.0 3.0 1.5 M2n:gement Support 1.0 FTE About.5 FTE About.2 FTE of RPS's (Permanent absorbed as effort branch chief) overhead probably by " lead Fellow" assignments and a larger portion of [ RPS's time I 1
t i l l December 10, 1991 ) USE OF ACRS FEILOWS r We currently have 11 ACRS members. At one time we had 15 members with an authorization for 15 Fellows. We currently are budgeted i (re our office staffing plan) at 2.5 FTE and have 3 Fellows on board plus 1 ACNW Fellowship FTE (i.e., most of the ACNW's share of the program) absorbed into the ACNW project staff. My rate of use of FTEs is currently running at 1.5 FTE over the budget for my work unit. I have been, in addition to my budgeted resources, using j rotational assignments, co-op students, and summer interns and have been keeping from 2 to 5 of these individuals on board providing j technical support for the ACRS and ACNW. i The ACRS members has stated that the type of support provided by the Fellowship program has been quite useful and have stated their I support for an expansion of this program. My reading of what I heard was that the members were endorsing the usefulness of One i type of support being provided by Mark Stella, Stu Long, and Steve i Mays and were looking for an expansion of our ability to provide this type of work product. These three individuals are experienced, well motivated professionals and are not easy to find. That the Washington, D.C. area has a high cost of living and the 4 high cost of relocating a household add to the difficulty. Our attempt to increase our authorized FTE allotment for these types of support will be accompanied by an effort to build up a " roster" of candidates. We will be attempting to get more FTE's for the FY F-3L
7 t 2 J 1993 budget year. If we are successful we will be able to hire people starting October 1992. Another possibility is to use ACRS staff engineers to supply, as part of their duties, the type of technical support that the ACRS members are in effect asking for when they ask for more Fellows. There are some problems in accomplishing this including existing workload and with what may (I am not sure) be a reluctance on the part of the ACRS staff engineers to take on more demanding technical tasks. I will continue to look for ways to utilize the j staff engineers and to requite rotational assignments, co-op i students and summer interns as I an currently doing. (The turnover / of tnese individuals is by its nature high and as a result s maintaining these programs has required a significant level of support from Stu Long, Mabel, Mike, and myself.) This is in fact what I will have to rely on if we are unsuccessful in gaining more FTEs. P Use of ACRS " Fellows" type support. 1. Projects in support of ACRS design cartification reviews - examine specific technical issues, in more detail than is usually done by ACRS members. An example is the work recently done by Mark Stella and Steve Mays in support of the ABWR review. C F -35
I ) 3 i 2. Projects in support of ACRS license renewal reviews. ACRS reviews are expected to start in early-mid 1992. 3. Projects involving a detailed look at risk assessment issues or industry and staff risk assessments. Examples are: a. Overview of PRAs submitted with design certification application. b. Surveillance of IPE PRAs for the purpose of sorting out significant insights for the ACRS members. Critical review of risk assessment analysis submitted in c. support of proposed resolution of generic safety issues. (An example would be Steve Mays work on SORVs.) d. Use of PC or minicomputer based codes to evaluate issues identified by ACRS members. (An avanple would be the work that Mark Stella performed on MOVs.) 4. Long to intermediate range planning of complex ACRS reviews ~ and support of ACRS sponsored symposiums. Examples are Stu Long's plan for the ACRS review of plant computer / software and Dave Ward's symposium on the use of PRA. 'Q. f bh l
j 1 4 l S. In depth technical support of ACRS initiated activities. P (Examples are safety goal policy and the recent work on containment design criteria.) 6. General technical assistance to the Members not falling into Categories 1 to 4 above. (A list from the Fellows monthly is attached with examples of this sort of project marked.) 7. Administrative support and technical oversight for co-op students, summer students, and rotational assignments. The idea here is that we can use part of the FTEs budgeted to our Office to supervise " free" FTEs to do work that we could not accomplish within our budget resources. Stu Long currently carries out this function. 8. Fellows initiated projects. One of the features of the program which helps in the requirement of individuals of the calibre of the three that we currently have is the opportunity to spend some of their time on self initiated projects in areas in which the committee has interests (an example would be the occasional paper which Mark Stella produces on artificial intelligence). A modest portion of the Fellows time (say 10 percent) should be reserved for this type of activity. 1 \\ x pz7; 1 ?
s S l l 9. I currently have the Fellows directly reporting to me (I currently have 8 individuals reporting directly to me besides i the students and some of the individuals on rotational assignments.) If the Fellowship program expands I may need to I come up with some intermediate level supervision. I believe I L that the current arrangement where all of the technical support people are under a single Assistant Director is a good t one and is well suited to encourage the cooperation of all of the technical staff. With a modest increase in the Fellowship i staff (say to 3 additional people) I would designate one individual as a " lead fellow" and assign some administrative duties to this individual. Beyond this it may be reasonable i to go to a permanent " branch chief." I T l 4 i 2[ l I i
i. sevisce: *.rth sc, 1993 ACRS AND ACNW STAFF ORGANIZATION CHART of fice of the Esecutive Director Rayeard F. Fraley -28049 Executive Director Carol A. Rowe -24516 Aesin. Secretary i I office cf Asst. Eaec. Dir, for of fIce of Asst. Exec. Dir. for Operations Nuclear Reactors / Nuclear Weste Mabel F. Lee -27742 Richard P. Sovie 28555 Asst. Executive Director Asst. Executive cirector Earbara A. Wade. -27906 $as Duralsummy -29522 Office kanagement Assistant Executive Assistant Ruby stapler 28004 Admin. Secretary Joan Kirkland -27914 Secretary I l l 1 Techn. Information tranch Operetterm Sgport Branch Nue. Reactors trend (ACRS) Nucteer Umste Branch (ACNW) Stanley Schofer -28118 Michael MacWittiams 28143 Cary culttachreiber -29518 kchardMajor ChiG7 Chief Chief Chief -28109 .Ethet Barnard- -27691 John Gilbert -28593 Peut toehnert --28558 -Giorgio Gnuanoll 29851 Info. systems specialist Admin. Officer Theems Rotetta -20972 Senior staff Engineer Me&at El-Zeftaq -29901 .Theron Brown -28730 Betty Thompson -27207 Dean nouston ' -29521 Chartette Abreas -28371 Little Gaskins -28970 Admin. Assistant Elpidio Igne -28192 .Newarti torson 27707 Olchete Kelton -24605 Senior Staff Engineers Staff scientist / Engineer Information Assistants Barbara Jo White -27288 Program Ass {stant kenman Alderman ' 27750 Betty Sanders -28037 $ toff Engineer secretary Linda Jahandarl -28041 secretary I f ACRS/ACWW fellows Stewart Long -27067 Mark $tetta 27334 Steven Mays 27904 John Chesley (Intern) 28166] Bobbi Romero (Intern)-27672l Of fice telephone Exchange: (301) 49 tsee individual telephone ruter above) Of fice Facsimite Nureer: (301) 492-7617 atletin Board Number: (301) 492-7384 f '2 P
) ACRS AND ACNW FUNCTIONAL DIRECTORY FUNCTICW A CJ_5 a,[g Actions, agreements, Assigrvnents and sewests Dur ai swamy Schcier Agerda f or full Committee Meeting Fraley (Rowe) Fraley (Major) Agreements Tracking System Savio major Announcements of future Meetings (Recorced Message) White White Biographical Information on Menbers ard Consultants Wade Wade Bu$get Lee (MacWilliams) Lee (MacVittianc) Buttetin Board System Schofer (Barnard) Schofer (Barnard) Bylaws Savio Major Central Files Kelton (Earnard) Kelton (Barnard) Classified Document Control Bernard (Schofer) Barnard (Schofer) Commitaents outttschreiber kajor CompJter services ers:i Support Schofer (MacWilliams) Schofer (MacWilliams) Conference Room Reservations White (Gilbert) Vhite (Gilbert) Conflict-of Interest List Fratey (Lee) Fratey (Lee) Congressional Affairs Fratey (Savio) Fratey (Savio) Consultant Appointment Wade (Lee) Veoe (lee) Consultant Management Lee (Citbert) Lee (Cilbert) Contracts Citbert (MacWittlems) Cilbert (MacVitllams) Copy Machine Coordinator Gilbert Cttbert Correspordence Preparation for Comittee Chairman Rowe (Stapter) towe (Stapter) Dalty HeadqJarters and Regional Reports Caskins Caskins Docket 50 Files Caskins (Brtnr) Caskins (Brown) Document ordering (Docketed Information) Caskins (Brtwn) Caskins (troun) Document orderire (Non-Cocketed Inforwation) Earnard (Kelton) tarnsrt! (Kelton) Document Reviewire Cognizant Ergineers' Cogn{ tant Engineers' Document Controt System schefer (tarne-d) Schofer (Barnard) Empt opent Lee Lee toJipamt Procurament ard Kaintenance Gilbert (Macultilass) Citbert (MacVittf ans) EPRI Document Ortiering Sarnard Barnard Federal Register hetices, Full Comittee Meetings Rowe towe r Federal Register kotices, Subcomittee Meetings Culttschreiber Major fellowship Program Savio (Kirkland) Savio (Kirkland) Fiie Management Keiton (Schofer) teiton (Schofer) FotIow-up Letter to the EDO Duralswamy Schofer forelen D~= ant Review sevlo Savio f oreign Meetires Savio Savio Fo!A Coordinators Schofer (Sarnard) Schofer (Barnard) High Level Waste fuW Accomting Hotel Reservations Citbert White (Thompson) White (Thomson) Inforsetion Resourca Management Schofer Schofer Key Operator for ReprodJction (qJipnent Gilbert (Kelton) tilber1 (Kelton) Letter Report Typing and Distribution R owe towe Library services Barnard (Ketton) Bernard (Kelton) License Fee Manpower Accomting System Citbert (Wade) Citbert (Vede) L B., hames in parentheses are backups.
- See the latest Subcomittee Assignment List for names of Cognizant Engineers.
F- @ .}}