ML20043H673
| ML20043H673 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 06/18/1990 |
| From: | Funches J NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS) |
| To: | Mattia M NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION (ADM) |
| References | |
| REF-WM-3 NUDOCS 9006260282 | |
| Download: ML20043H673 (15) | |
Text
y
.o
@S ESCO o
UNITED $TATEs
'EJ I,i NUCLE AR REGULATORY COMMISSION e
7,.
j WASHINGTON, D. C. 20bbb k...../
JUN t 31990 l'El10TJf.'DUM FOR: Mary Jo Mattia, Acting Director Division of Contracts and Property Managen'ent, ARM TROM:
Jesse funches, Director Program Manager.ent. Policy Development and Analysis Staff, NMSS
SUBJECT:
BACKGROVi!D TO SUPPORT WAIVER TO HIRE NRC CONSULTANT NONCOMPETITIVELY The purpost of this memorandum is to request a wavier of NRC policy (NRC-5101-0C3) which prohibits non-competively contracting for the services of current or former I:RC employees within two years of their employment with the NRC. The request is to use the service of Dr. Steven R. Abt, an NF,C Consultant, under a non-competitive contract with Colorado State University (CSU). The basis for this request follows.
In 1987, the NRC entered into an agreement with Dr. Steven R. Abt to provide i
f consulting services under Personnel Agreement AT-(49-24)-1654. The agreement has been renewed several times and will expire on June 30, 1990. The principal purpose of this consultatory personnel agreement was to provide expertise in the areas of reclamation design for uranium mill tailings sites and low-level waste disposal sites. Under this agreement, Dr. Abt assisted the NRC staff in the review of several reclamation applications and provided expert advice on natters related to erosion and flooding.
The staff also previously utilized the services of Dr. Abt through CSU, when CSU served as a subcontractor to Oak Ridge National Laboratories (ORNL) for several tasks under FIN B-0279. As the principal investigator under the subcontract with ORNL, Dr. Abt performed fiume studies which provided data and information to assist the NRC staff in the review of reclamation designs involving rock erosion protection covers.
In providing this data and information, Dr. Abt was directly involved in the planning and execution of fiume studies which validated the use of specific uthods for determining i
erosion protection requirements. He was also the principal investigator for various analytical studies which were used to determine state-of-the-art methods for predicting gully erosion. Dr. Abt also assisted in the development of regulatory guidance and preparation of nun.erous NRC staff technical evaluation reports. Dr. Abt has concentrated his efforts in the reclamation of-uranium mill tailings sites and, therefore, has gained unique regulatory j
experience, which cannot be equalled by any other consultant known to the NRC staff.
For the above reasons, it is recommended that Dr. Abt be a principal i
investigator under the proposed non-competitive new contract with CSU to provide information regarding analyses of soil covers to insurc adequate l
protection against surface water erosion at waste disposal sites.
i 9006260282 900618 WASTE PDC 414,18 j PDR WM-3 NLl 4 MLlJ
g L',
We beliCve that a contract with CSU that utilizes the expertise of Dr. Abt is i
in the best inttrests of the Government, fGr the following reasons:
i (1) Dr. Abt has extensive, unique experience in the performance of flutae studies and in the design of erosion protection. He published several technical reports that were used in developing regulatory guidance and has served as a consultant and advisor to the NRC on many occasions. He is, thus, aware of NRC policies and procedures. The development of this re.gulatory expertise in this area of specialization would require a significant amount of time and training of other individuals. We believe that Dr. Abt is likely to be the only individual who has the necessary regulatory experience in the areas of uranium mill tailings reclamation and fiume studies to support our regulatory needs.
(2) CSU possesses flume testing facilities that are not duplicated anywhere in the world. These facilities are critical to the success of this project.
Development of new facilities to duplicate CSU's existing f acilities would require the expenditure of millions of dollars and delays of 2-3 years.
This is unacceptable, because the data and criteria are needed invnediately.
(3) In the new contract, the NRC staff would be able to utilize CSU staff including Dr. Abt, to support LLW and uranium mill disposal site reviews and studies. Therefore, the existing personnel appointment agreement would not be renewed. Dr. Abt would not be used in any ca)acity other than through the non-competitive contract.
Further, Dr. A)t would not be assigned to review any of his own previous work.
This would be assured by caref ul assignment of specific tasks by the Project Officer.
Detailed information regarding the proposed contract, with additional justifications for non-competitive placement, may be found in the Request for Procurement Action (RFPA), attached.
In sumary, Dr. Abt is vital to CSU performance of the various tasks under the proposed non-competitive contract. Dr. Abt, who is now employed as a consultant, would no longer serve in that capacity and would perform all new tasks under the new contract.
HowcVer, he would not be assigned to review any of his own previous work.
It is necessary that this new contract be started as soon as possible, in order to allow the staff to effectively review several reclamation plans which have been submitted and to update existing staff guidance in several areas. Therefore, I recomend a waiver be granted to allow i
the contract to be awarded to CSU which would use the services of Dr. Abt.
Oracinni sicnea ty Jesse funches, Director JcEe Punches Program Management, Policy Development and Analysis Staff, HMSS
Enclosure:
As stated i
DISTRIBUTION:, _,*JFunches Centrab m e N tf RHall, URF0 EDavis GBeveridge NHSS r/f RLBangart PLohaus JJSurmeier JGreeves l
JAustin JLepre r/f LAltoft r/f TLJohnson MFliegel PDR Yes:
(/
l PDR No:
/
Reason:
P.oprietary /___/
or CF Only /_)L/
ACHW Yes:
/
No: /)(/
SUBJECT ADSTRACT:
$CKGROUND SUPPORT WAIVER-HIRE NRC CONSULTANT NONCOMPETITIVELY l
- SEE PREVIOUS CONCURRENCE (t d%
DR~IIIDB*
- LLO$f p :LLOB*
- LLWM*
- PMDA*
- NiDA*
- PMDA l
'f/ J RAEITGohnson/jl:MFl T:PLohaus :EUangart :EDavis ~~~TCIIeTeriiige:JF l
DATE:06/06/90
- 06/06/90 :06/06/90 :06/09/90 :06/11/90
- 06/12/90 :067p90 L
DITICIAL RECURD~CDPT j
7
,i i
a
' C/W 1
3
/-
r effectively review several reclamation plans which have been sukaf tied and to update existing staff guidance in several areas.
It is iluperptive that a waiver be granted to allow the contract to be awarded to CSU'and to use the services of Dr. Abt, i
JesseFMches, Director Prografii Managelnent Policy Development aJid Analysis StaIf, NMS$
Enclosure:
As stated i
l L
DISTRIBUTION:
Central file 426 RHall, URF0 EDavis GBeveridge PMS$ r/f RLBatigart PLohaus JJSumeier JGreeves JAustin JLepre r/f LAltof t r/f-TLJohnson' MF11egel JFunches PDR Yes: /"T/
PDR No: //
Reason:
Proprietary /~/
or CF Only //
i AC Yes:
E/
No: /~~/
SUBJECT ABSTRACT:
BACKGROUND TO SUPPORT WAIVER TO HIRE NRC CONSULTANT HONCOMPETITIyflY 0llYbck t
.J mAU n
r 1
M,
'DTC :LLOB
- LL
- LLW
- LLWM j:PMDA f:PF
- PMDA T#iETTLJdhn; syn /jl:MFliegel :PLohauD :RBangart:EDay)$
- GBe eridge:dFunches DATE:06/6/90
- 06/g/90:06/g/90:06/[6l/90:06/l /90 :06//#90 :06/ /90 0FFICIAL RECORU'TUFY 9
k
' ',1 i >
.k.
= di u.s.tuc aAa neouwony coasteission RECURST PZR PROCL/REMEWT ACTEN (RFPA) is w iuc.
o,e.so m,c.
13 US? o,.ttaceestants
..,,..........e,e.,.,.,.,.e.e,....
<*si.
g.,.,,
wc.co.
3 il/A iv.a o= c a 'i a,* *.'. =vwe a C *6 v.i +o. i.isio io
.,36
, e.e,en
- si eae e s.s v De oes. *e.e, '., r e ;.a' es'.e ea tee'.
. St es s.wg to og gopcittf =.co,t.og 'o *.s cinta.6. gue i e e*e.eseeos e, #'x AD
. whtoucotD D.o.0s.6 as? 8+C.mc4 i
systie.c.non so. goncow.tw*ivt emock.twant e.,,t ois,o
,o o. wi..,o io..ei.... te.. - u d.eI..,s. e.N**e.....,,
o.. c','eY., ee.N...s.
E'[.Y Y.[ !*I,h.U,','e eI N
e Ai' 8tt.bch 8 0..tcvSit*C 4 08 te%%W'.%' lI#wiCli **C 80 To be submitted separately
' pu.iog. wi.ti s,...c.,,...,,o,,..,,,,,,,
3 ust estima te
.. e r
.,.o co.,.....,
e e,. oui.
..-o n o..,.oe,.....no.
-n
[w M qr II:T %C
'M 3100K 5130K
- 100K 5330K st.
i s ev o o to.m m.,
n
..,Z -,.,.
o..v.,
o, e..,,.
..c,% a, 3100K r.
Eleni N. Davis. PMDA/P!B/NMSS [2.. _ c
,e.
/ A#< w
[fb
.m.
050-19-33-01 N/A i
L1410 0 i
U nnr i~
i i
is asicuect oresceae n.us Ted Johnson
- waitsto.
lr:6as. owe =vwesa 56y o.ase=o,omsetononessesen,,,
a xp344o cr:::r.:.', 31,;ued by l o.fi desse L. Funches, Director Jesse Funches MAR 151990 0#GLN4Att04 Program ilenagement. Policy Develoosent and Analysis Staf f. nttSS i a m.
Distribution:
NMSS PPB 3.4 L1410 NMSS r/f RBangart, LLWM PLohaus, LLWM TJohnson, LLWM E0 avis
.9)+' *R M PMDA:PIB PMDA:P PMD -
- Eorv c
co cBev riece JtWes 03///9 03
/90 03// /90 03//f/90 808 08v'0804 08 C0efRACT S Vet 0.eLY /O. a., eress.
sees.me, iserV?ta3smaae deshAL testev MADt intC tw0 C,$c8800 079ttW l o.tt tt't#tD
- = - _ _
.a.n.s..m.e esa. en i v.s. nuctaan nesotatony comenessom a
,p enen 1945 90-003 nt^uest P n PaoCUREMENT AC710N (RPPA)
- m.,w m.
, o.vi = =uit
. o. ueriow...,...,s r.. ~. i.... +..,.. e.......c <
,i
.wo,.e,e.u
.e
= rm
%.~,,4.e,o,~..e. -c x:0~~ci i
,,,c.
j,,, e,.,,, m,,,,
m
,,........,,...,..,~.-.,,r...,........
c
- ...w.. +.c. r. e,.e n+c., m. m... i.. o.......,.... LJ:.:!gaecel,.;; 7','r$""~c'o u n...... ~. d.e,,
s,'.'.?g,'*,*,','.,
l, m,,..c.,,,,,0. c o,,,e,
- u. -c t -
i a--c,: -
3 uneoor aew es
. oruna se-c3 <t xi....:. o co grv4 cow = ct,o, e.,,,,,,.
'S Award 3 years 3 krado State Universit/
i jtmo... e essen.e sament oo.,
. gg.> o to.,
, pp c.
no. ~
m u s ooa
- 4.,...e
..n 4.
7
_ f,u.N,,,1 c..,
c> o., r u Division of Low-Level Waste danagement and Decosmissiontng e tma w.=amet ase oms, assons em,w.am,se
' Methodologies for Design of Soil Covers at Waste Disposal Sites" We request DCPM enter into negotiations for a noncompetitive award University for development of an integrated methodology to assess th e
performance of soil covers at existing waste disposal sites.
I delineated in the attached Statement of Work.
The work scope is assistance in expediting this procurement is appreciated. pr Your The estimated level of effort for this procurement is approximately 5 3-year contract period.
FY90 funding of $100K is certified for this project, i
(
l i
io gagraspate =a e secoco o e wt. seen,ce
,w..
>.,. e-,
(
t % Sff. ASSE.08 tee.Lt Stenste Joe,Y St LL Eutsett - LASCA SJMUS A8EA atT.A4,ot
..aflag agt.A3CE Fop th LL BAp438 t % LA40A tulMUS AstA ggt.Ateg 8
88 F
tethtk. &. QED S
o i4.s.QaheNT D8EC?t48 A88LtCA46Lity e
btScalatow
.8*utAOLt o.. c.eu-..,.,3
.e.,,,..,,
= 7 C.att DEhrtc Nthera X
gtgtgo,.Jy,iss~acocao t.c.s wevo x
t.umov.L som.covisi ch or con 64,.Nt sgaviCES eS
%4CW.,3.#
t X
.. i
DCR5dE i l
l
\\
~
L l
STATEMENT OF WORK l
METHODOLOGIES FOR DESIGN OF SOIL COVERS AT WASTE FIN NO:
L1410-0 B&R NO: 050-19-33-010
1.0 BACKGROUND
Protection of public health and the environment from potential hazards of waste materials has required assessment of waste stabilization design procedures and methods.
of an earthen cap over wastes for long-term isolation. Current stabilizat Reclamation standards and regulations, including 40 CFR Part 192. 10 CFR Part 40 Appendix A, and 10 CFR Part 61 to insure low-m,aintenance stabilization for periods of 200 to l
Erosion protection design components must protect waste covers and side slopes from overtopping flows caused by localized intense precipitation.
Design criteria must be conservative enough to insure cover stability yet be economically feasible.
Reviews of soil cover designs have required the use of very conservative criteria based only on theoretical soil cover requirements or on empirical i
i 1
design criteria, generated in a previous long term stability investigation.
Additional testing of soil covers is needed to verify that certain types of unprotected soil covers are viable alternatives to providing rock erosion protection.
2.0 OBJECTIVE OF PROPOSED WORK The NRC staff requires an integrated methodolofy to assess the long tem perfomance of soil covers at waste disposal s' tes.
In order to be confident that the longevity of soil covers is acceptable in meeting the regulations and standards contained in 40 CFR Part 192,10 CFR 40 A and 10 CFR Part 61 an extensive body of data is needed to develop additiona methodologies.
To date, the NRC staff has had very little information on which to base the predicted performance of soil covers.
The objective of this contract is to provide infomation regarding the analysis and design of soil covers to ensure adequate protection against surface erosion at uranium mill and LLW sites.
This contract will provide technical support on hydraulic and geomorphic design aspects for existing and future sites and detailed capcbility for overall systematic assessment 4
of site licensing.
m_
_. _...,,.....,.., - _ _ ~... -,
e i
(
l 2
l Specific objectiv'es of this contract incluce development of appropriate design and review procedures for quantitative prediction of erosion rates t
I and long term stability phenomena.
The contract will provide detailed methodologies for assessing various long term stability phenomena and will provide the NRC staff with the capability of assessing the long term survivability of soil covers, 3.0 Work Scope i
The contractor shall perform the following tasks.
3.1 Task 1 Prediction of Scour and Erosion Conditions in Gullies Utilizing available flumes and rainfall facilities, modified as necessary-to conform with the needs of this project, the contractor shall determine quantitative relationships for assessing gully formation and drainage basin development as a function of time.
Using various soil types and slopes, the contractor shall analyze maximum gully depths vs. time,il location of maximum gully depth, gully shape, and the effects of so type on gu11ying parameters.
The contractor shall conduct approximately 10 tests using several different i
slopes and several different soil types. Slopes of 25 and 205 shall be-tested using non-cohesive and cohesive soil types.
Stores of varying magnitude shall be used to assess and predict the performance of gul 1es for a period of 200 1000 years; such storms shall range in magnitude from everage annual events to a Probable Maximum Event,-and shall attempt to simulate the total rainfall expected to occur during a 200-1000 year period.
Final determination of the number and type of tests shall be made by the NRC Project Officer and authorized by the NRC Contracting Officer.
The tests performed in the fiumes and rainfall facilities shall be supplemented with additional analytical and field studies. This work will include analysis of actual field conditions at reclaimed sites where actual gullying has occurred and can be quantified. Approximately 10-15 sites shall be investigated, and sufficient data shall be collected to determine poneral relationships which can be used to assess long term changes to gu lies with regard to location, depth, and size.
A final report shall be developed which sussurires the studies conducted and provides generic procedures for assessing the magnitude and rate of gully changes. This report shall include performance assessment methodologies for predicting the location, rate, and magnitude of gu11ying and shall be applicable to small drainage areas and relatively steep slopes such as those found at typical reclaimed uranium mill sites and low level waste sites.
1 3
3.2 Task 2 Determination of Allowable Shear Stress 1
The centractor shall conduct a series of laboratory and fiume tests to determine the best methods for predicting allowable shear stress.
The i
contractor shall assess the applicability of typical procedures, such as
)
those of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and U.S. Bureau of Reclamation.
The contractor shall recomend methods for the determination of appropriate shear stress values for use in prediction of long term performance of soil The tests shall be conducted for both sheet flow and gully flow
)
covers.
and shall include determinations of allowable shear stress and actual shear stress.
The contractor shall conduct approximately 10 tests in flumes or rainfall facilities to determine the shear stress resistance of various soil types.
The collection of data should be cenducted in conjunction with Task 1.
l' The contractor shall determine the allowable stresses associated with both 1
sheet flow and gully flow.
1 The contractor shall prepare a report which provides generic guidance on prediction of shear stresses and/or recossends documented procedures which are the most accurate in predicting allowable shear stresses.
1 shall also recommend quantitative procedures for predicting changes whichThe may occur to shear stress levels as a function of time for a period of
.200-1000 years.
]
L 3.3 Task 3 Assessment of Unieve Desiens As designated by the NRC Project Officer and authorized by the NRC Contracting Officer, the contractor shall conduct approximately 10 flume studies to examine the feasibility of protecting soil covers with designs which do not necessarily conform to standard design practice or may be unique to providing stability for a long period of time. Such designs could include
)
rock transition areas between changing slopes rock chutes, and installation of steeper upstream slopes to offset soil cove,r requirements.
The contractor shall develop other design configurations for possible future testing by examining current practice in the industry.
The contractor shall prepare a report sumarizing the tests conducted and the parameters measured.
The report shall provide procedures and
}
recossendations for designing unique structures or soil slopes.
3.4 Task 4 Short-Term Technical Assistance The contractor shall provide technical assistance to the NRC staff regarding surface water hydrology 4nd erosion protection aspects of LLW and uran'un mill disposal sites.
Specific topics will be identified and t
authorized in writing by the NRC Contracting Officer on a request-specific basis.
3
)
4 4.0 REPORTING REOUIREMENTS 4.1 Monthly letter Status Reports Each month, the contractor shall submit a brief letter status report that summarizes significant findings and results and (1) work performed; (2) personnel time expenditures; (3) travel costs for each individual by trip;
(
(4) significant problems or delays in delivery of products; and (5) costs and uncosted obligations, including subcontracts, listed separately:
during the previous month, (b) cumulative to date (by fiscal year and' (a) total) the cur, rent fiscal year.and (c) projection by month to completion of th The first monthly report shall provide the initial projectionst subsequent reports shall either indicate revised projections or indicate "no change in the cost and uncosted obligat projection."
The report shall be submitted to the NRC Project 01ficer by the 15th of each month.
4.2 Technical Reports The contractor shall prepare formal technical reports for each task of thisStatementofWort(50W).
accordance with NRC Manual Chapter 3202.These reports shall be prepared in Formal reports shall be submitted in draft and final form.
Final reports shall be edited and reviewed by the contractor and checked in accordance with the quality assurance requirements described in paragraph 9.0 of this 50W.
technical reports shall be self-contained and will be suitable forThe formal publication as NUREG/CR reports.
Draft formal technical reports shall be submitted for review at least 60 days before the completion date of each assigned task.
after submittal of the report, the NRC Project Officer will comment inWithin 30 da writing on the report.
The contractor shall revise the draft formal technical report based upon these comments and submit the final formal technical report to the NRC Project Officer within 30 days after receipt of the NRC Project Officer's comments.
i All final reports shall be submitted in camera-ready copy to the NRC Document Control Center for publication as a NURE6/CR report.
4.3 -Deliverable products Products to be obtained from this contract include technical reports which 1
discuss design methodologies for the evaluation of soil covers to meet appropriate long-term stability requirements.
Individual reports will be submitted describing the work performed by the contractor and describing acceptable methods for evaluating the following:
Task 1 - Magnitude and rate of scour and gully erosion. This report shall I
be submitted within one year from the effective date of this contract.
l l
s 3-m.v
.,.,,w
-,.- -..~.-
.. ~ -., _
m-
.,----,.------m-
i i
Task 2 - Allowable shear stresses.
two years from the effective date of this contract.This report shall be submit Task 3 - Unique design configurations.
within three years from the effective date of this contract.This report shal Task 4 - Short-term technical assistance.
Reports shall be submitted as of this contract. directed by the NRC PO within one to three years from t 5.0 Meetinos and Travel i
5.1 Meetinos Itisestimatedthatthecontractorshallparticipateinatleasttwo(2) meetings of one or more days duration in the Washington D.C. metropo area during each year of the period of performance under this contract.
The contractor will particip.te in meetings as directed by the NRC Pro Officer.
The first meeting will be an introductory meeting to discuss all i
aspects of the project and the testing strategy developed by the NRC Project Officer.
and products under this agreement, provide for techni staff and contractors, and provide technical guidance on implementatio 5.2 Travel i
The contractor shall participate in travel as directed by the NRC Proj Officer.
Trip reports shall be prepared after all travel performed under this agreement is completed and will be submitted as separate corres to the NRC Project Officer within 2 weeks of the completion of the travel unless otherwise approved by the NRC Project Officer.
not be required or authorized.
Foreigntravelwill 6.0 NRC Furnished Material t
The NRC Project Officer shall provide the contractor with necessary l federal regulations, regulatory guides and reports relevant to all tasks cover,ed under the work scope of th contract.
j 7.0 Period of Perfomance i
\\
The period of performance for this contract will extend from the effect date of the contract for a period of three (3) years.
j 8.0 Technical Direction
\\"
TedJohnson(FTS 492-3440) is designated as the NRC Project Officer (P0) for the purpose of assuring that the services required under this S0W!
delivered in accordance herewith.
i l
d 6
9.0 Ovality Assurance, For all draft and final reports delivered under this agreement f
the contractor shall assure that an independent review and verifica, tion of all numerical computations and mathematical equations and derivations are performed by qualified personnel other than the original author (s) of the reports.
If the contractor proposes to verify / check 1esJ than 100 percent of all com report (s) putations and mathematical equations and derfvations in the routine, r,ep(etitive calculations), the contractor must first written approval from the NRC P0.
Computer-generated calculations will not require verification where the computer program has already been verified.
The NRC PO has the option of auditing all documentation including project correspondence, drafts, calculations, and unrefined data.
In addition all reports, including those which do not contain numerical analyses mus,t be reviewed by the contractor's management and appro two signatures one of wh above the progr,am manager.ich is for the contractor's management at a level When revisions for the reports are issued, a section must be included in the revised report to document dates of, reasons for, and scom of all changes made since issuance of the first approved report by tte contractor.
NRC has the option of appointing a Peer Group to review the draft report and make changes to the final report. The contractor may recommend candidates for the Peer Group for approval by the NRC P0.
In the event of dissent in the content of the final report the dissenting party will have the option of stating its viewpoints and findings in a section of the report.
10.0 Estimated Level of Effort The estimated total level of effort for this contract is approximately 5.0 staff-years with 1.0 SY in the first year of the project and 2.0 staff-years in each of the following years.
- -. ~.. -,. _
9
\\
ENCLOSURE 2 i
Justification for Non-Competitive Procurement I recommend that this State University (CSU) procurement be non-competitively negotiated with Colorado
, Fort Collins, Colorado, for the following reasons:
1.
Criteria for the design and review of soil covers for uranium mill tailings reclamation are needed immediately. At the present time, the NRC staff does not have a systematic method for addressing the long-term performance of soil covers, and there are several reclamation plans which have been submitted for st&ff review and approval.
CSU is the only organization which can provide the required information in a timely manner, since CSU has been previously i
involved in the preparation of review criteria for rock covers and has knowledge of regulatory requirements related to reclamation covers. The use of any other contractor would require an extensive amount of training in the repulatory aspects of uranium mill tailings reclamation.
This would result in de ays which would not meet the programmatic needs of this agency.
2.
There are several laboratories and universities in the world which perfora-similar flume studies, such as: (1) the Waterways Experiment Station of the ti.
S. Aray Corps of Engineers; (2) hydraulic laboratories in Delft, Netherlands; (3) hydraulic laboratories at the University of Iowan (4) hydraulic laboratories at St. Anthony Falls, Minnesota; and (5) hydraulic laboratories at the U. S. Bureau of Reclamation in Denver, Colorado. These laboratories have the technical capabilities, but do not have the necessary l
facilities to perform the tests required by this contract. This contract requires the use of c fiume which (1) is located indoors. (2) is large enough to accomodate large flows. (3) can handle large amounts of sediment, especially since soil covers will be tested to failure, resulting in releases of very large quantities of sediment, and (4) can be tilted and adjusted to several different slope angles. CSU currently possesses such a fiume. Any organization other than CSU would have to construct specific facilities to meet the requirements of this contract. The construction of new facilities would not be required at CSU. This results in a substantial cost and time savings, i
3.
CSU also possesses other unique laboratory facilities essential to the success of the project that can be used to perform the testing required to demonstrate soil. cover stability. These facilities have been used in other NRC contract work (FIN B-0279) and some instrumentation for these facilities was developedandperfectedusIngpreviousNRCfunding.
CSU has personnel trained in the use of these facilities and instrumentation. To use any other contractor would not be as efficient and cost-effective.
4 A portion of this contract includes technical assistance on an as-needed basis to the NRC staff.
CSU has previously provided technical assistance to HMSS and URF0 on long term stability applications. The NRC staff has reviewed the work of various consultants in the areas of long-term stabilization of uranium mill tailings sites. These consultants are typically hired by the uranium mill industry to design reclamation plans at mills licensed by the NRC.
-~-]
4 2
l Based on this familiar.ity with many available consultants, the NRC is not aware of any other contractors who would be available to consult on such matters, l
since most consultants knowledgeable in tailings reclamation have been employed by the uranium mill industry.
Use of contractors other than CSU may result in -
a conflict of interest situation.
Therefore, CSU is uniquely qualified to legally provide timely and expert technical advise on such matters; we are aware of no other contractors who possess the necessary experience. in long-term stability applications and in the regulatory aspects of uranium mill licensing and reclamation, p
Recommended ~' hj
, Project Officer Terry r.jahe4y
/h'/!90 Date
$%( L LA Richard Bangart, Director Division of Low-Level Wasta Management and Decosmissioning, NMSS
-i
l Enc /cw e ?
ATTAcegNT GOVERNMENT COST ESTIMATE RFPA N0.
PROJECT TITLE FIN.No.
$** I & * O N h Jf ol d S C05T RE!MBURSEt'ENT Cl PER@ OF PMMM
& @-n U
LG PROJECT OFFICER 7 L. 7c /yvc,
DESCRIPTION OF COST ELEMENTS Total Es tima ted Rate Per Estimated Es tima te<
l.
Direct Labor (List Labor Categories)
Hours Hour ($)-
Cost ($)
Cost (S fafenso.vA BOO
?f 4[000 Ainn
(% hv.,.e~2 1000 3S~ 10C000 Total Direct Labor
/fCOOO 2.
Labor Overhead Including Fringe Benefits Rate Total Labor' Ent. cant (11 120s
_ / S'o ooo
/80000
/80000 3.
Subcontracts (Identitv. pornee. ret.W $1)
Est. Cont (1) s Total Subcontracts 4
Travel b %gg 33 Aco/"f Est. Cost {$)
60000 5.
Consultants (Identit;,.j;g,{fge($))
Est. Cost (S)
,-.:n....._
Total Consultants 6.
Other Direct Costs'(Itemize on separate sheet) />1aM4/ /M EDOOO 7.
TOTAL DIRECT COST AND OVERHEAD ' 3go, coo 8.
General and Administrative Expense (Rate: 20% of Line 7) 66,000 9.
TOTAL ESTIMATED COST 336000 10.
Fee or Profit. (
% of Line 9) 11.
TOTAL ESTIMATED COST AND FEE 0A PROFIT TYPE 0 NAME AND TITLE T.L.Ghmon,9.%kukk5 hbhTb SIGNATURI
/&
^
OFFICE /0! VISION / BRANCH DATE N?w/ttyylyca_
.3llykl9n
ENCLOSURE 4 1
I
'I i
STATEMENT OF SUFFICIENT URGENCY lt is necessary that this project be started as soon as possible.
The NRC staff has received several reclamation plans for review at various Title II sites.
design to provide long term stability.These reclamation plans include toil co dcwever, the staff does not have-specific review criterf a pertinent to the long term performance of soil covers.
Such criteria is crgsutty egeded to assist the staff in the review of those
~
reclamation plans.
delayed for month's. Othervise, the review and approval of these plans could be 4
CSU also requires some lead time to purchase racessary noterials, such as clay soils and rock mulches; enlist the services of graduate students to perform the construction and modifications of fiumes and rainfall, needed facilities; and to meet with NRC staff on the scope and direction of the contract.
The immediate completion of these preliminary activities is urgently necessary to assure that testing can be completed during favorable weather conditions.
i i
i 4
g""i i""i -i s
i