ML20126A310
| ML20126A310 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Vogtle  |
| Issue date: | 07/25/1977 |
| From: | Ehrensperger W GEORGIA POWER CO. |
| To: | Varga S Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20125E340 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-84-430 NUDOCS 8506130305 | |
| Download: ML20126A310 (2) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:... . _-
/
( , GaonaenA Powmaa Corsa%2tr // // _
'T w.s annemesseeen s70 PEACHTREE STngs seen
= == = P, i ATLANN'A. I July 25.1977
]. ,
fg7gg 1 Nee. United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation ATTN: Mr. Steven A. Varga, Chief Light Water Reactors Branch 4 hg. hkb . Division of Project Licensing
. Washington, D. C. 20555 MP)dd. -
)
~g4C(hd'r%f.~ 'y l NRC DOCKET NLMBERS 50-424. 50-425 CONSTRUCTION PERNIT NUPSERS CPPR-108,109 k kdy ,
ALVIN W. V0GTLE NUCLEAR PLANT UNITS 1. 2 f , , CATEGORY I BACKFILL er // p. c - Gentlemen: j This will confim the clarification and agreements reached with your NRC staff at the meeting in Bethesda on July 22. 1977 in connection with the Category I backfill at the Alvin W. Vogtle Nuclear Plant. More specific details concerning the words used in the PSAR in connection with the Category I backfill were discussed. Specifically, a more detailed definition of the meaning of the words " select sand" was given and che manner in which "97 percent compaction" will be tested and evaluated in the field was defined.
" Select Sand" The clarification of the terminology of " select sand" expressed in Section 2.5.1.7.3 of the PSAR is' the sands and silty sands from required excavation.
i stockpiles and borrow areas. The sands and silty sands, regardless of the
, specific source from which they are obtained, are considered to be " select sands" as discussed in the PSAR and other relevant documents in connection with the Vogtle Plant.
Caspection Criteria The average compaction shall be 97 percent of the maximum determined by ASTM D1557 with no tests below 93 percent and not more than 10 percent of the tests shall be below 95 percent in a set of 20 tests. These in-situ tests will be made at a depth not exceeding 24 inches. ! Minimum Testing Frequency In-situ density tests will be made at a minimum frequency of cne test per 20.000 square feet of fill placed per foot of depth. The average compac-tion will be evaluated for each set of 20 field density tests made after Placement in any area in which fill is placed.
. . .- ~ ..
8506130305 850219 PDR FOIA ' BELLB4-430 PDR , -
- , - - - ,. -,,, ,,w.,
o . . j - ,
+ %
I f U. 5. Nuclear Regulatory Comission , ATTN: Mr. Steven A. Varga. Chief Page two ' July 25.1977. - 1 All of the analyses and information presented in the PSAR are valid taking ) into account the clarifications presented above. j During the July 22, 1977 meeting, you were infomed that a program is under- I way to analyze soils for backft11 of df fferent characteristics and different 4 specifications for compaction which will conservatively meet the safety require-monts for the Vogtle Nuclear Plant. Presently it is expected to have the analyses completed and criteria estab-lished by November. 1977. At that time it is planned to request a meeting with the NNC Staff to present the bases for the modified criteria. It is emphasized that the information presented above is merely a clarification of . existing criteria and in no way represents any change in the comitments made in the PSAR. Your arranging the July 22, 1977 meeting and your participation and that of your key staff personnel is very much appreciated.
~
Yours very truly. fW.f E.W ~@ Ehrensper LEE /JA8/nc ac: Mr. D. L. McCrary ~ E Mr. I. 5. Mitchell, III ;;; Mr. R. A. Thomas r f_ b;; '~ Mr. J. A. Bailey .. Mr. D. E. Duttone U 37, i~i Mr. Walter R. Ferris c': ..- Mr. L. T. Gucwa ? 7
- E-Mr. W. R. Holland ? =;I Mr. G. B. Rogers, Jr. 8 N l' Mr. V. Srintvasan o si Mr. M. R. Thakar -
George F. Trowbrfdge, Esquire
~
- i. .. ,
'4 50-424 fk~, M United States Departrnent of the Interior 5g_g 5 MI
-b" GEOLOGICAL SURVEY -
50-427 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20242 I v May 11, 1973
,wr hw\ / e.\ ., .. n*sQ e. vn. ,
n! t+
,/\y . V,x
.f *>. s 4.
' ' Lt.- \..
.+
Mr. William P. Ca= mill, Chief -/$ ,. .s:p,h
\' ' M b. 1 - ,e we *'.. [
Site Analysis Branch k /
. , U ig- M OM*
,7 8
- 4. g Directorate of Licensing g ' ,
i .: i
., g, f .q 77e
, , ' ' t g,G...
U.S. Atomic Energy Cc.:issien t'- - 3' . r- . ..- 4915 St. Elmo Avenue . , . {y["' . k g,%gf .w )*. Bethesda, Maryland 20014 E.p, . J ;~ *- .y y Attention: Mr. Cardone and Mr. Hulman'Myi' V Oear IIr. Ga:=2ill: The fellowing ccements pertain to the apparent increase of intent by p wcr companies to utilize ground water for cake-up water purposes at nuclear , po. cr isl:nts ; this t::s sp.ccifically proposed at tha A. .. Vogtle /lcat in Gaorgia and less specifically indicaced by the 2acific Gas cac Electric Company in California. It would appear that the applicants in these cases
'vish to set c pr:c: dent in establishing the design and ceceptability of
- , ells es Clatt I 3: rue:arce. It c..y be 7:tni m te set.nlich the conecut of utili:ing wells as class I cake-up water sources at the Vogtle Plant, but even if this is done it whould be obvious that every new site application would require a separate and complete evaluation.
Therefore the concept has no specific value as a precedent. ~ It is our opinion that with the present state of the art, even the cen-cept, since it is new, may justify special evaluation. Such an evaluation would require criteria that must be met at each proposed site. The fol-lowing are some, but not necessarily all of the criteria.
- 1. An adequacy of the ground-water supply both for the present and in the future - including both technical cad legal uater rights aspects.
- a. Te:cr;nination of the adeque.c'y of sepply teoul' re ;uire c::-
tensive pumping tests of preceribed type (s), using a number of ebservation wells; long-cice pumpage froci supply wells at a prescribed race and for designated pariods of time to identify specific h drologie characteristics of each preposed aquifer,
- b. A demonstrated aquifer capacity of several times the de-signed need; such as by a 4 actor of 5 with due consideration being given to future de.aands frau other ground-water users (A sort of maximu:n pessible aquifer development. MPAD).
3123 ZT6d , TV
. J
- 2. Design and construction of a Class I well which included:
- a. Seismic considerations and the resultant stresses on the well and pump station
- b. Longevity of well casings and screens.
- 3. An operational and maintance program for the wells which would guarantee pump readiness as well as the aquifer capability.
- a. A prescribed water supply development plan including frequency, race and duration of pumpage.
- 4. Possibly, if ground-water were to be relied upon, it would be desirable to increase the requirement of a greater storage volume in the ulti ace heat sink to provide 45 or 60 days supply instead of the customary 20' days. Ihis uculd allow for redrillins and developing of wells should chere be couplete failure.
Indirectly relaceo is the potential problem of reatine and emergency pumping of ground water in the plant site vicinity.
- a. Consideration of the potential cite subsidence which =ay re-sult from lowering of.the aquifer hydrostatic pressure. For example, Davis and others report land subsidence of as much as 200 cm in the Savannah, Georgia crea ocu ts ; s;;;c. Zhis u:uld seen to 1 eve a particular significance for the Vogtle site. (See attached paper).
- b. An adequate engineered design for potential differential setting and acceptable amounts.
We should ponder the power industries purpose in proposing Thethe acceptance consumptive of Class I wells for ulti= ate heat sink make-up water. use of water for conventional cooling towers for the condenser cooling water requires make-up quantities conciderably greater than that for the ultimate heat sink and requires locating the plant where a fairly large (probably at least 100 cfs per 1,000 Mwe) source of surface water is available. Hence it would seem reasonabic that Therefore the same source the usewould be of cells adequate for the ultimate heat sink mahe-up. for the ultimate heat sink aale up wacer would :pp:c to be adraacateous only for those plants considering dry coolin3 to ers or for plants located several miles from the curface water source which could be reached only by a Class II pipeline therefore justifying and requiring on-site Class I wells. 2
. - , - - - - --,c. 4
4 We believe the point to be made here is that certain design basis need
- to be set forth by AEC governing the application of Class I wells.
Furthermore that to establish these criteria, experts in several areas need to study at least the above items in detail as well as other areas of concern and set forth the required guidelines. Sincerely yours,
- p. /. %,1/.99,f
/? j F. A. Kilpatrick Hydraulic Engineer Office of Radiohydrology Uater nascurces Civision Enclosure .
e v
.. e
.. g ,
/* . ,
; g3 A M.
J '_ y ., ipo ". L y .Q% ' WW y LAND SUBSIDENCE DUE TO WITHDRAWAL OF FLUIDS , J. F. PoLAxn Axn G. H. Davis U. S. GeologicalSmey, Sacramento, California, and Wa:hington, D. C.
. ! z -
. '*?:js' -
QS
,vg% {M@eO -
'~
Reprinted from - Rcritws tx ExoIxcenrxo Grotoor II Published by The Geological Socie:y of America,Inc. P.O. Box 1719 . Boulder, Colorado 80302 .# - 1969 b
F
. . a i~
. d i
- - . . . ~ . . . . . . . . . , . .
.~. - h s.
= __
230 arvisws IN Excistenixo crot.oor: it 50 m, but the pore preente decay has been retarded by the low permeability of the silty chy beds. Consolidation can occur only as fast as the excess pore pressure is reduced, and the rate at which this can occur is a function of the permeability and thickness of the beds. Estimates of the proportion of subsidence caused by compaction of the upper 50 m of deposits that include the two bentonitic chy beds range from abou: two-thinis to 85 per cent, depending partly on loestion and the increase in effective stress (Zeevaert,1953a). Evidence from the protruding easings of Plate 3 suggests that at mome places, at least, the compaction of the top 100 m of sedi-ment is about equal to the subsidence. Recognizing that the arte=ian-head decline can be stopped only by reducin; the local ground-water drait. comprehensive plans have been made for impo-:in; water to the city.Since 1952, several new projects have been compIcted to brin; water into the city, and others are under construction. In addition, reservoirs and recharge wclis have been constructed for the purpose of injecting r!ood waters i:aa the aquifer system. According to Quintero t1953),13 recharge wc!*ahave been installed since 1953, and others are planned. Achtorriedgment. The authors acknowledge the assistance of 3fr. Jose A. . daCosta of the Geulogical Survey in tr a.dation of the paper by .W .21. 2.; others (1952). The authors also uish to thank Slessrs. R. J. 3Iarsal, I. Sa:nz-Ortiz, and Leonardo Zeevaert for supplying several publications. SAVANNAH, GEORGIA Davis.and others (19G3) reported land subsidence of as much as 200 mm at Savannah, Georgia, due to decline of artesian pressure in a limestone aquifer. p5 Precise leveling in 19.1S,1933,1935, and 1955 by the U. S. Coast and Geode 7 Survey indicated maximum subsidence of bench marks of about 100 mm. 3Iat of the subsidence occurred during t,he period 1933-1955. Pumpage increased from 23 million gallons per day in 1933 to 57 million gallons per day in 1955, and decline of artesian head was about 40 feet in the 37 years beiere 1933 and about 100 feet in the 22 years after 19$1. A close correktion was noted between sub-sidence, pumpage. and decline of artc<hn head. During the period 1933-1955, subsidence exceeding 20 mm occurred in an e tc. of 50 square miles including the city of Savannah and extending 5 mile to the north and west. As shown on Figure 25, the subsidence corresponded closely in areal extcut to the area of greatest decline of artesian pressure during the same period. Figure 2G shows the rehtionship between land subsidence and decline of artesian prewure, 1933-1955, alon;: a profde extending from 10 miles north of Savannah through the city to the AtLmtic Ocean 10 miles east. The ratio of cubsidence to decline of artesian pressure at Savannah of 0.00% suggests that the maximum subsidence may have been about 200 mm from it@ to 1955 in the area of greatest decline of pressure. The maximum rate of sub-sidence reconled by a bench mark was -10 mm during the 10-year peried 19& 1955 at a point about 2 miles south of downtown Savannah. Unlike the sediments of many other subsiding areas, the principal artcaian 4
..4
. . . . ,, n . u. . . . A.y .:n.. . _, a a.n. . . . ,,,, , .. . . _.:.,.: , .. . .m.
y .. Pol.AND AND DAVIS-IAND 5tJU5fDENCE 331 oo*
'/-J 37 st i
\ vv e W TIDE CAUGE 1
A 60# kQ /N- 55 LINE OF EOUAL DECLINE (14 o.
,A FEET)CF HEAD 1933-1955 4
{ 849 t / c+y 4
//ck'/<A /+
j' & o
\ ho\
\
i
/
F'71 AREA OF MoRE THAN ZoMM sues!DENCE 1933-1955 i
\ ge,t s4,. ---
S, .o k ,* === s
\(I-{:#M* hs;.aSUS $10ENCE PROFILES N. U,4, h q. Gh
.', I [ }
j % (y n ,' % (
%.: *',..:s - ..
L Qs
#o 's ' ~*
N
" *=
~
32' t- W V t'~ . .i u.
/ ,
[~ L 9 -
' tv./ w figure 25. Declhie of st:uian prenure and stib.idence, 192-1933, Savsansh area, Georgia.
(After Davis and others,1963.) squife- at Savinnah, in which the pressure has declined, is a limestone sequence. . .. The so.dfer ranges in age from middle Eocene to Miocene and includes the ' Gosport Sand (middle Eocene), the Ocala Limestone (late Eocene),imdiffer-entiated limestone of Oligocene age, and the Tampa Limestone (early Miocene). The Ocala Limestone makes up substantially more than half of the sequence. The principal aquifer is confined below by marl and ilmestone of the Lisbon Forma- , tion (middle Eocene) and above by silty deposits of the Hawthorn Formation (Miocene);it consists chiefly of sof t, granular, commonly highly porous limestone but includes also beds of sand, marl, and sandy, clayey, chcrty, and dolomitic . limestone.
- Davis and others (1963) concluded that the subsidence is due to compaction of l
the principal artesian aquifer in respec to decline in artesian pressure and that the compaction probably occurs chicily in the soft limestone ;md in the inter-g bedded clay and marl,which may be highly comprecibic.The ratio of subsidence j to decline in head has been about I to "00, that is, about 100 mm sub=idence to l 100 feet of head dechne. HOUSTON-GALVESTON AItEA, TEXAS Land subsidence due to withdrawal of ground water and petroleum has been j
- knon in the upper Gulf Coast area of Texas for many years. The subsidence of the Goose Creek oil field on Galveston Bay was reported as early as l'J20 and l
1
. . _ . _.. .. .. .. _ . ....._____..==.
e-o e
.y . e _ v- ; . s- . -- _._ _ _ 4y_ _-.-. .
t' 232 mzvizws tx Exc xtraxxc crotoor:1: S AVA N N A H SAVANNAH 8E ACHg ,* E<m2 Eocw SS Su.%E$$$2_22 s< x, .a s ovvie- :) D 0$ o o 3 w e 3 K V g !; q8JJ ddu 2 40< .. ~ ......*.., o l*:'.7........-y.----}'oi
/ 40 2
** ,,.. .3.d
. DECLINE OF ARTESIA?! .gn' h y PRESSURE 1933-I955 w
, 80- 4 o d usLEs 7 80 [;. -
~
- 0 0 b 2I U BENCH MARK ON BUILDING
!gco z 120- o w -
O PROBASLY NOT RE PR E- u h SENTATP.E h
$160' O u" m o
, 3 Figure 2G. Prof.!e' of land subsidence and dee!!ne of arteska pre.sure, WG-W,>, Savans ares, Georgia. (After Davis and others,19G3.)
has been discussed previously in this paper. Win 5!ow and Doyal (1954) in ;. paper given before the American Society of Civil Engineers reported on additional leveling results and suggested means for alleviating the subsidence in the Housto:: area. Winslow and Woed (1959) de.cribed subsidence throughou: an area " i 7200 square miles of coastal Texas, including Houston, that extends from Free-port to Port Arthur and 90 miles inland. The follod.ng summary has bees prepared from those papers. Geology. The upper Gulf Coast of Texas is underlain by unconsolidated sand and clay strata of Tertiary and Quaternary age that dip and generally thicke:: u toward the Gulf. Accordingly, the strata crop out in bands that parallel the coast; inland they contain fresh water, but most contain salt water within s - short distance of the shore. From the top down, the units penetrated by wate: wells are: the Beaumont Clay (Pleistocene), which ranges in thickness from zer: a few miles northwest of Houston to 000 feet at Galveston and includes the Alts Iema Sand of Rose (1943), about 250 (cet thick at Galveston; the Lissie Forma-I tion (Pleistocene), which thickens from 900 feet at Houston to 1500 feet a: Galveston; the Willis Sand (Pliocene [?l), which thickens from 500 feet at Houstac to 700 feet at Galveston; the Goliad 8and (Pliocene); and the Lagarto Cl>y I (31iocene[?]).
, The Beaumont Clay is the principal confining bed at and coastward fre:-
Houston. Although the llcaumont consists largely o(calcarcous clay, it ine!ade a few bcds of fine sand which are the principal water-yiciding units at Texas City
, l and in the Beaumont Port Arthur area. The Alta Loma Sand (llose,1901) is t! c
, principal aquifer at Galveston, and the Lissie and Willis form the princi:- l 2
squifer at Houston where they have a combined thickness of 2000 feet. I A recent X-ray di! Traction study of the clay-size fraction of fine-grair.cd i samples from a core hole at C! car Lake, Harris County, indicates a clay-miners i assemblage of montmorillonite, i!!ite, chlorite, and kaolinite. Montmorili. .te :r
=
tM%($i!.% 2 United States Departmdnt of the Interior
"=3 '
NY'N GEOLOGICAL SURVEY ./. r('v-*~ o ' l / f.
~y o.
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20242 .' . '
/
m [l. *o,. f.]rf,,l = !.'._ October 5, 1973 " ' i *d. .
- O l'g0
? '.', :)
7 i '[cy . t(.'. .. - o. .
.:n .
' .( :.,- a L{' N.' g, . , . y).
Mr. William P. Gamill, Chief Site Analysis Branch Directorate of Licensing Office of Regulation U.S. Atomic Energy Comission Washington, D.C. 20545
Dear Mr. Gammill:
Enclosed for your information is the second preliminary review of aspects of the geology of the Vogtle Nuclear Power Plant, Eurke County, Georgia (AEC Docket Nos. 50-h24 to hP.7). The reviev was prepared by Mr. R. H. Morris. A previous preliminary review on this plant- vas trinsmitted to you on Mari:h 27,1973 e S'.ncerely yours, , idf Elmer H. Ealt: s Deputy Chief for Engineering Geology Office of Environ = ental Geology Enclosure 0 19
/
>85.*** 1 nd.)
$%e .5 ?
- r. . s. ,
- s Preliminary Review #2 September 11, 1973 R. H. Morris Georgia Power Company
- Vogtle, Nuclear Power Plant Burke County, Georgia AEC Docket Nos. 50-424 to 427 Geology The geologic information provided in amendments 3 and 5 of the Preliminary Safety Analysis Report submitted by Georgia Power Company for the Vogtle site has been reviewed and evaluated as responses to the questions 2'.19 through 2.25.. All responses appear
~
to be adequate with the exception of those for questions or parts
.thereof (2.20, 2.21, 2.25) which are related to the buried Triaanic
, . . .. basin. '
m i h 1i --e.. dea f m~6.b vJ i.l.; .r-b - . .. * .
,. F* '- ,c-.
The response to question 2.25, dated 7/27/73, is given in amend =ent 5 and : figure 2.5-4A, amendment 3, dated '7/6/73. Figure' ,
.$ 2.5-4A has been modified from the original (Siple,1967, USGS WSP
) . ;
1841) by the addition of the location symbol for the VNP site and as shown the' site is immediately to the ' west of the inferred Triassic basin. The site is very generally located in figure 2.5-4A with respect
' to the Triassic basin and appears to differ significantly f rom the , - location shoun in figure 2.5-3. Either of the two locations presented n
requires discussion of structural relationships to the Triassic basin.
~' ? a- ,
YY%le5 0Uf0h_ p
, . -i, ,
~
, . , , As plotted on figure 2.5-4A, the location is in line with the northwest boundary of the inferred Triassic basin, which, in view of the precision of the available magnetic data, could well project to the southeast beneath the location given for the site. M'arine and i Siple (1971) state that in'a test hole located about 9 miles northeast of the VNP site, about 1,590 feet of Triassic fanglomerate was penetrated
, before entering crystalline basement. A group of seven test holes lo-cated about 2 miles north of the above hole all penetrated crystalline rock below the Coastal Plain sediments. The northwest boundary of the Triassic basin appears, therefore, to be abrupt with over 1,500 feet of relief--much of which could be structural-expressed on top of the crystalline basement.
. When the location provided in ffgure 2.5-3 is used, the site is
~
- c. . approximately over the inferred southwestern Triassic basin boundary.
-3_
'~'
.~ . ,. . _-.;. - -. - - -
'The trend of this boundary appears to be p'arallel and to lie generally below the axis or slope of the southwestward dipping conoclinal flexure illustrated -in figure 2.5-10.
The applicant should provide a site vicinity map that accurately portrays the site location and the underlying structural features and revise the discussion of the relationship of the site to the under-lying Triassic basin structure as required. Reference cited Marine, I. W., and Siple, G. E., 1971, Buried Triass'ic bas'in in the central Savannah River area, South Carolina and Georgia [ abs.} :
- Geol. Soc. America, Southeastern section, Abstracts with Progra=s ,
- v. 3, no. 5, p. 289-363. -
"2 pe.
,, , _.,_.-e , ,.., ,
3 . . ~, . M,,i United States Department of the Interior !
$ hi 6 50-424
- GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 50-425 i WASHINGTON, D.C. 20242 50-426 l June 20, 1973 50-427
. ~
< ""?
! C ' ."l. .. ii. .
Mr. William P. Ganssill, Chief b( .(' Site Analysis Franch , 1
% e ,[ 4., , , ' -
Directorate of Licensing ( el
- U.S. Atomic Energy Coumission s g.
k915 St. Elmo Avenue \ 'A , ' N '. Bethesda, Md. 20014
' ' ~ ' ..
Dear Mr. Gammfil :
. Enclosed for your information is a draft site examination report for the Alvin T. Vogtle Nuclear Plant units 1, 2, 3, and k-(AEC Docket Nos. 50 k24, h25, h26, and h27). The draft report was prepared by Mr. R. H. Morris.
Sincerely yours, 71/f Elmer H. Baltz Deputy Chief for Engineering Geology Office of Envirec= ental Geolcgy Enclosure e 4013 Tf05250/5 5'
a DRAFT REMorris 5/21/73 Site Tramiention report, Alvin T. Vogtle Nucleair Plant Units 1, 2, 3, 4 Docket Nos. 50 k2k, h25, h26, h27 The site visit to the Alvin T. Vogtle Nuclear Plant (VNP) was conducted April 2h and 25, 1973. In attendance were representatives from the applicant, Georgia Power Co., and consu} ting fir =s Southern Services, Inc., and'Bechtel Corp., and =e=bers of the AEC staff and U.S.G.S. The TNP is located on the southwest bank of the Savannah River, near Auguste, Georgia. TheAECSava$rahRiverPlantisdirectlyacross the river in South Carolina. All =ajor facilities of VNP will be on the crest of a bread well-drained hill. Sr.rface scils are sandy and are derived frc= veathering of typical coastal plain sed 1=ents. Within the near surface strata are calcareous fossil-::enes that in sc=e instances , i have been dissolved by ground water and collapse sinks have for=ed ever l
. I the voided zone. The applicant plans to re=ove these critical strata in J the are. of Class I structures. The excavation vill require re= oval of
~
about 100 feet of strata in order to reach a suitable founding stratu=, described in the PSAR as the bearing stratu=, which is a clayey silty arl. . The r.arl has very lov per=eability and for=s an aquaclude between ground water of the overlying and underlying strata. The clay /=arl ranges in 9
---,-_a , _ _ _ -- _ _ _ - , , - . , y- -, _--_-<~._-~_.e- (,u , , , . - - , - - - _ - , , . + - -
,-c.,.--,-,, - , _ -., -,, _ . ,
,, o ?.t. - . _.
-s
- ~
thickness from 60 to 100 feet. Two velocity layers are recognized in the unit, a lower zone with a sonic velocity of near 7,000 fps (compressional wave) and an upper zone of about 5,000 fps. Outcrops of the unit were observed"in bluffs along the Savannah River. Core samples from several test holes, selected from over 300 holes . drilled during site subsurface investigations, were displayed for examination. Structure contours of the bearing strata show a southwesterly-plunging asymmetric anticline with very shallow dips to the southeast and slightly steeper dips to the northwest. There are no indications of faults within the area for which structure contours are shown. The VNP site appears to be favorably located with regard to structural setting, although there may be some nearby Triassic basin-bounding faults buried by the 1,000 or more feet of coastal plain strata in this area. J e s 2
i' b .
, C
- T4p> ag .
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY 50-424 CFFICE OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS 5 -4 3
@ IEdrEson.
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20314
- 50-426
, 50-427 DAEN-CWE-S 31 January 1974 s .
c 4@Nf!:. .
). y-[) '?G- f e
. Mr. T. Cardone FEB1 1974 n- i j'.h Site Analysis Branch Directorate of Licensing [34 u. Ap*!:,,t,:;:t;? f i ; ;g'. ,
.{ ,
Atomic Energy Comission \ " .Am ,^, Washington, D.C. 20545 ,',;f ,7;"jy
Dear Mr. Cardone:
Inclosed are Geology Branch coments on Amendment 13 for the Alvin W. Vogtic Nuclear Plant as requested by telephone conversation on 30 January 1974. Sincerely yours, 1 Incl ERNEST L. DODSON As stated Chief, Soil Mechanics Branch Engineering Division. Directorate of Civil Works ' s V
*)
d noenmn i
""8 - - i
~
%! FEB1 1974 >
muuar Mall SEE05 { {
, IECKET CLatt
- 6. 2
_ m i 994
-9:cC2sM Q . - _ _ __
- .._... .- ~. . - - __ - . _ _ _ -
.A k -
t ( DAEN-CWE-G 30 January 1974 l ALVIN W. V0GTLE NUCLEAR PLANT SAVANNAH RIVER GEORGIA POWER COMPANY Of original concern to this office was the relatively small number of borings which penetrated the clay-marl stratum which will comprise the foundation for the four reactor units at this site. Inasmuch as this formation is in part calcareous and contains many limestone lenses, the distinct possibility existed that undetected solution voids or channels could occur directly beneath these critical and heavy reactor structures. The only rational method for investigating this possibility was to put down more borings and conduct more downhole geophysical and hydraulic pressure tests within the marl bearing stratum at the specific locations of these nuclear structures. The Georgia Power Company has now performed a substantial amount of i additional borings and downhole t,esting to firm up the essential engineer-ing properties of this bearing stratum. Twelve additional core borings were drilled at the specific locations of reactor units 1, 2, 3 and 4 and penetrated completely through the marl stratum. Generally, good core i recovery (90 to 99 percent) was experienced with these borings indicating minimal or no solutioning of the formation. Additional confirmation was secured by hydraulic pressure tests conducted in several of these borings with practically no water loss. One boring however, No. 516 in Reactor . Unit 2, recovered only 44 percent of the core material penetrated. The reason for this core loss should be explained as related to causes other than solution voids, particularly since there was also no hydraulic pres- ' sure testing performed in this particular boring. l Except for not at the moment being able to explain the abnormally low <: ore . recovery on Boring No. 516, it is the opinion of this office that the additional borings and testing program have satisfactorily proven the bearing capacity of the city-marl formation for all structures. c' 677 ht )/ ld'** NORMAN A. DIXON ~ Staff Geologist, Geology Branch f Engineering Division Directorate of Civil Works l i
m 4 i h AP?. 0 I E'4 { ') ( ,
/
- V. A. Moore, Assistant Director for LWRs, Group 2, L .
SER INPUT PLANT NAME: Vogtle Units 1, 2, 3, and 4 LICENSING STAGE: CP DOCKET NUMBER: 5042If 425, 426 and 427 RESPONSIBLE B : LWR 2 i REQifESTED COMPLETION DATE: 4/22/74 . APPLICANTS RESPONSE DATE NECESSART POR NEXT ACTION PLANNED ON PROJECT: NA DESCRIPTION OF RESPONSE: NA REVIEW STATUS
- f Attached is our input to the Geology and Poundation Engineering I sections of the Safety Evaluation Report for the proposed Vogtle Nuelame Power Plant. The seismology input will follow in-a few days.
DISTRIBUTION: 4 L-Docket File g 0:4w .. ..; Ly L-Rdg H. R. Den:oe , L-SAB Harold R. Denton, Assistant Director L-AD/SS for Site Safety
- Directorate of Licensing
Enclosure:
As stated cc: w/o enclosure A. Giamhusso W. Mcdonald J. Panzarella SS BCs cc: v/ enclosure S. Hanauer R. Klecker J. Hendrie - D. Eisenhut W. Gain: sill J. Carter E. Kniel S. Varga L. Crocker A. Cardone A. Kcnneke - L:SAB L:S L:AD/SS on, c *
.g ._ __.. ,
.va a -
- AIC.ardonetbao .WP 11. _HRDenton_..
4/19/74 4 4 4/f,3/74 Foran AEC.)l8 (Re. 9 51) AECM 0240 e*o cas se s e mes.: s ao.n ee pssfl
O O . GEOLOGY AND FOUNDATION ENGINEERING V0GTLE SER INPUT , DOCKET NO. 50-424, 425.,. 426, 427 g 2.5 Geole,y and Seismology The geological and seismological aspects of the proposed Vogtle site have been reviewed by the staff. We have not received a final report from our advisors in the U.S. Geological Survey (U7GS) regarding their evaluation of the geology and saismology of the site area. However, we have received a draft report from U.S.G.S. It is our conclusion and that of our advisors that the geological and seismological investigations and evaluations are acceptable and that the applicants proposed earthquake design bases of 0.12g for the operating basis earthquake and 0.20g for the safe shutdown earthquake represent appropriate conservative values. 2.5.1 Regional Geology The site is located in the Atlantic Coastal Plain Physiographic
- Province, approximately 26 miles southeast of Augusta, Georgia, on the eastern margin of the Tifton upland and adjacent to the f Savannah River. The plant will be underlain by Coastal Plain sediments consisting of from 800 to 1000 feet of predominantly clays,' sands, limestone, and marl, ranging in age from f.
5, ' f I . b
.JL *%ee* ** s
__ )
~
O O Cretaceous to Recent. An apparently downfaulted block of Triassic red beds underlie the Coastal . Plain sediments. Igneous and metamorphic rocks typical of the Piedmont rocks in turn underlie the Triassic red beds. Adjacent to and northwest of the Atlantic Coastal Plain l
,. Province is the Piedmont Province. The boundary between the two provinces is known as the Fall Line which is approximately 25 miles northwest of the site. Rocks that characterize the Piedmont disappear beneath the Coastal Plain sediments at the Fall Line, but no structurally significant boundary exists.
The deeply buried structural geology beneath the Coastal Plain, is not well known. Of particular significance to any site in the Southeastern United States is the tectonic feature that is responsible for the seismic activity in the vicinity of Charleston, South Carolina, fr.:luding the very large 1886 Charleston earthquake. This activity is believed to be associated with a specific structural anomaly that is confined to the area in the vicinity of Charleston. Evidence, though limited, seems to indicate that the numerous earthquakes that have occurred in the Charleston vicinity are localized'along the i deepest part of the northwest trending Southeast Georgia Embayment. The Charleston area is approximately 100 miles east
'i i t
O O
~
J' . southeast of the site. - The site lies within a northeast trending Triassic Basin approximately 1 mile southeast of the northeast trending probable fault that forms the northern boundary of the Triassic Basin. We and our U.S.G.S. advisors are of the opinion that any faulting associated with this Triassic Basin does not appear to have been tectonically active since Cretaceous time. Furthermore, there are no other i identifiable faults or other young geologic structures in the area that might be expected to localize seismicity in , the immediate vicinity of the site. i 2.5.3 Site Geology Solutioning of a near surface limestone strata has produced surface depressions throughout the site area. To assure 1 adequate foundation conditions to support the plant structures, , l the applicant will remove all strata including the soluble limestone strata down to firm, hard clay-marl at elevation 130. Select sand backfill or lean concrete will be placed from the top of the firm clay-marl bearing strata up to the design elevation of the Category I structures. There is a dip reversal or flexure in the clay-marl bearing l l 1 -
4 O . O - 1~ .. t ' - 4'-
~
I strata illustrated in figure '2.5-10 of the PSAR, which was the subject of much investigation and discussion between the applicant and the staff. The possibility that it was a fault l controlled feature, namely the probable northern border fault l e of the Triassic Basin, was considered. Numerous holes were drilled to determine its character. Since the assumed border fault would have to be down-thrown towards the southeast, the fact that the flexure in the marl slopes in the opposite north-westerly direction precludes a genetic relationship. 2.5.4 Foundation Engineering Although a large number of borings were drilled over a large area during the exploration work, relatively few of the borings penetrated the clay-marl bearing stratum. Inasmuch as this formation is in part calcareous and contains many . limestone lenses, the distinct pessibility existed that undetected solution voids or channels could occur directly beneath the critical and heavy reactor structures. The only rational method for investigating this possibility was to put down more borings and conduct more downhole geophysical and hydraulic pressure tests within the marl bearing stratum at the specific locations of these nuclear structures. h _ _ , _ ~ - _ _
f O
~ '
O
-S-
.r-The Georgia Power Company performed a substantial amount of additional borings and downhole testing to firm up the i l
essential engineering properties of this bearing stratum. [ Twelve additional core borings were drilled at the specific i' locations of reactor units 1, 2, 3 and 4 and penetrated, completely through the marl stratum. Generally, good core recovery (90 to 99 percent) was experienced with these i borings indicating minimal or no solutioning of the formation. Additional confirmation was secured by hydraulic l pressure tests conducted in several of these borings with practically no water loss.
l
. 't
. m
~ f. , ~ ~
- DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY 50-424 orries or vsc CHIEF QF ENGINEEMS *
$Q.42$
WASHINGTON. O.C. 20314 50-426 W 50-427
=7,4 .
.- , 1 DLEN-CWE-S - 6 June 1973 !
o
. q
S j
00/}(2 ~~ h M
. d 'j, .j (. gk- 3 Mr. L. Manning Muntzing 2-i-
~ -
e Director of Regulation Atomic Energy Commission - \ ,, ~ ,%r g
. Washington, D.C. 20505 [-% 4 N/
r- -
Dear Mr. Muntzing:
At Mr. Thoc.as Cardone's request, we have reviewed the eight volume Pre-liminary Safety Analysis Report on the Alvin W. Vogtle Nuclear Plant. Our review covered only the soil mechanics and geology features of the proposed structures. There are no earth dams in the proposed system,
, so the comments pertain only to the analysis of static and dynamic sta- ,
bility of the foundations of structures and of earth slopes. I Inclosed are review comments that have previously been informally given I to Mr. Cardone. In addition to these, we suggest that additional borings on 100-foot centers be made around the circumference of the four condenser cooling towers, to determine if there are any significant variations in founding level that would be required by the effect of solution cavities in the mari.
- Table 2C-4andFigure2C-6shbtverywidevariationsinstrengthand i
density of the clay bearing stratum. The borings in the founding area
! of each structure should be reviewed to determine if there are soft or weak zones large enough to cause much lower bearing capacities or =uch larger sectiements than those calculated on the basis of the average values used in Table 2C-8.
Sincerely, ,
% D l 2 Inci JAMES L. . L7X ,/
Brigadier General, USA As stated ,, Deputy Director of Civil Works McC'd O!!. U:;. ; . ., Date d // U *
~'
3SS2 nm ii 'm AD 2.koi?Tx -
~
;. . ,_ .- A_ :
, _ i
{* '. : . f -
, ~
~. .
f,
. . ~
... - i, , .
',%.} - -
V .
- t. - . .
. f. .
'h
~
. QAEN-CWE-G 14 May 1973 4 l
SUBJECT:
Conssents on Alvin W. Vogtle Nuclear Plant, Savannah River, y ~..,% Georgia Power Company .. j.
.. f
*- "3. Category I. Water Wells to Sunoly Cooling Water During Emergency y ~Shut-Down of Reactors. ,,
. a. Project Recuirements. The client proposes to drill four water ',,, -
i+' wells (one for each reactor) to supply emergency cooling water to the [- , reactors for a minumum period of 30 days during emergency situations. - ,
- t. "In these instances each of the walls must simultaneously be capable of 0 -
8-ing a sustained 1000 gallons per minute yield for the 30 day
.I period.
- b. Test Well Results and Analvsis Performed. The test well was drilled and casted for 48.5 hours at 1200 gpm, then an additional four p -
hours at 1800 gym. At neither of the above discharge rates were stabil-U- ised drawdown conditions achieved. All analyses from the test results were thgfore based on nonequilibrium conditions. Total well depth is nearly teet I c. Recommended Additional Well Test Procedures. The client's tests
!! and analyses appears to have de=onstrated that a potentially a.:ple supply of emergency water of 1000 gpm for at least a 30 day period will be available from each well. However, this office does not believe that the p . test data presented in the report fully supports such a sustained yield at a pump setting at only 150 feet depth for these interfering well
; systems. Therefore, as a check en both adequate pump setting and adequate i;) sustained yields we recoc=end that.a well pu= ping test also be perfor=ed
.!- under stabilized or equilibrium drawdown conditions in order to verify
; - the client's nonequilibrium testing procedure and analyses, upon which
; ; seetr important cell design decisions were entirely based.
,- . d. Descriotion of Recomended Ecuilibrium Well Test and Analvsis.
In order to perform an approx 1= ate equilibrium pu= ping test on ene present test well (or on one of the other future three wells), a reduced pu= ping
.; rate as for example, 300 gym should be run until no appreciable creeping
,.; drawdown continues to occur in either the pu=p well or observation wells.
A second and third pumping rate at two then four times the original rate is performed, both to similar stabilized drawdown conditions. (See
.. sketch). The three stabilized drawdown rates can then be plotted against
.. their em.=ponding three stabilized drawdown depths as shown in the fourth graph on the sketch. From this empirical curve, a safe and con-servative depth then can be selected (by interpretation or extrapolation) for a pump bowl setting which can deliver 1000 gpm yet be safe from
" pumping air" due to drawdown all the way to the pump bowl level. If, i
as it likely with these wells, a small creeping drawdown continues to occur during the pu= ping test at one or all of the above recor= ended pumping rates, the approxi= ate stabilization depth can still be approxi-
. mately determined (for this special case of limited 30 day pu= ping) by 2
!. l a..- .
f
. _ _ _ - _ _ _ = . - - _ -. - - . __
a e
.. .~ .
)
. - .u- --
, , t
. D&EN-CWE-C -
14 May 1973 l .
SUBJECT:
Comments on Alvin W. Vogtle Nuclear Plant, Savannah River,
,. Georgia Power Company.
1 .... ylotting drawdown against time and picking off drawdown depth just below the flatter portion of the curve. (See three upper graphs in sketch).
! -e. Other Recomendat ons. Prior to permanent construction of
- 6 facilities it is recommended that at least two adjacent wells be pump i' tested sis::ultaneously 'in order to (1) verify full drawdown amounts under interfering well conditions where each well is pumping at the design rate of 1000 gpm and (2) verify that any ground settlements near structures from aquifer compaction will not be detrimental. It is also recommended that submersible pu=ps be installed in the permanent system for greater operational safety and reliability under emergency conditions.
; These pumps and wells should be group tested every six months or so to
, insure reliability in time of needed use.
6 I ' i.
'1 Inc1 A'. DIXON 1 Sketch Staff Geologist, Geology Branch Engineering Divistoa Directorate of Civil Works h .
i . m 9
- l. -
I a A t - t . e .-
?
i
! 3 i
i
, r- -
m
. . R.v u i I I u] \ \ unii WIl~ I i-lU U
~
- m. n .
4- srh .rke .-
, k &- - -Lu
. - .- / - - - - . - - - - _ _
' 3CO.GPki;\V-
~
r h 1'
\.
600 GPM '> ;l 2 0 0 G P t .. .
.. , . ~ %~ -
. . k, i: - . .
g_s_ __ __ _ _ _- - ;( i "
.g
- y ,,,.g %gg .*, .
. \ -
4 '. f- - Q----_' - - - _ - N - ~ 1 I D I
- -!h:
. cR4. _
_ . _ \_T _ 2
= u hit y :-i
- 1, . .
//mv .
//m u ,
.. /pr;<.,
i.O ,
- \
t
.~j -
c/ .
,- o
\ .
i s k . i . . e g l.1' .. . \.
.,..s .. , . . . -
_ .~. . : .,. .. l v ,.,
~ .
.. .,. . , . ; s.4. .
- if.
s.! - \ * . ,. 0,V. . . , M. i U.'
- 4 s
's
.. e 4['=_.'*. " E' .*.4 /* ..t o I .* =
[ j i k s, . s\ .N -
. ~.k-R 4
R s N
. kN f is .. %
N '-
\
kY* Emo Arl D.:pth y J
~
~. ,L l
Y - t
) - -
t x,. G
,, 2
- i. u or/a/rie < c>Puupmg wa.r,o .o o O
. L o
w
..t..".: .s, :Q sle l'L d l 9 P i d '\,1/
. <,_, i
- h. (/
i
,t_ i c U g L,f3 i ~
4 y . 2 4 h e.' k.ktbr -.J a m l _ 5 % 300 GPM \ 600 GPM . I 2CD GPiv
- i. E N_ ,\ -
)
) -
4 % ~- \ Y saw/an u,,n r . .< .__.__ ______ l ' p*2. c#3 __ - __ A _. _T ._ w .24LZ y 21 M~ , a-1h-
/ M?O 5 / 72 & /M7)O o Shhc Mnr bvs/
\
i:
\ $O 0
ge -
- ' \ G h#f
% \- . .
4 q x p~ g o i i \ s.
!. @ #4 -
%(
l k N x = 4 u; k N
~
D .9 {$a pgss mu_ _ ~
' h @
~_+ *, -'
kY . j ! t l s u n J a % ,o , x s 1 O O e n
^
~ ' ~
- _._.... _ ,_ L i
-l' . ..
r:7 . i l
~
D&IN-CWE-G ,. 14 May 1973 i i ResMIANDUM TO DAEN-CWE-S -
SUBJECT:
Consnents on Alvin W. Vogtle Nuclear Plant, Savannah River, Georgia Power Company i
- 1. During the course of conducting exploratory work for siting the nuclear power plants and auxiliary structures, a substantial number of borings were drilled over a large area and corresponding large amounts of test data accumulated. From these deployed investigations, the client has constructed a geological model of the subsurface conditions upon which complete founda-tion and seismic design has been based. It is agreed by this office that the general geological conditions at the selected sites are basically as described in the report. However, it is also felt that more specific details of the foundation conditions, pertinent to design, could have been overlooked, due to ths resulting wide net spacing of borings covering critical structures at the selected sites. For example, some solutioning of the calcareous clay (marl) bearing stratum can not be. entirely ruled out.
If, for avample, as stated in the report, the marl samples tested contained 50 percent calcium carbonate, then other nonsampled (due to wide spaced borings) areas of the foundations may contain higher percentages of this soluble mineral. As a result of these or other formational and erosional phenomena, unexpected voids, channelways or localized weaknesses could now exist within zones of foundations influenced from some of the heavier structures. 2.* The two borings shown in each of the two 160 foot diameter reactor containment structures (Figure 2.5-11-Vol. I) or relatively few borings
~
[
~ shown in the turbine buildings and control structures are not believed to be sufficient to develop all latent foundation conditions which could be j
of significance to design. It is therefore recommended that at least for the heavy and critical structures .which contain the nuclear reactors, 1 , borings be placed on a minumum grid of 50 feet on centers and penetrate
.at least 40 feet into the marl foundation stratum. This criterion would average about eight evenly spaced borings per reactor containment structure.
The other important structures such as control buildings, turbine buildings, etc., should have an average spacing of no = ore than 100 feet on centers or less, depending upon the reliance that can be placed on geologic inter-
, pretation between borings.
l l O W Tm...,,__._,....,___,,...__..._-,,,,-.,__,.,,---ge ---e~=
. - _ w
. 'l_
- 5 .
~
l D&EN-CWE-G 14 May 1973
SUBJECT:
Consnents on Alvin W. Vogtle Nuclear Plant, Savannah River,
- j. Georgia Power Company -
- 3. Emergency cooling Water Wells. Because of the insnediate availability of the large backup .sourcs of emergency cooling water from the Savannah River, the emergency water supply from water walls is not considered a critical item. Therefore, no consnent is offered on the emergency supply wells.
I {, .
. DIXON Staff Geologist, Geology Branch 5
Engineering Division, Civil Works
. ee
, ..e ,
T s B 2
. 6
. i ,
f ^ 6 T2 , { \' j t VNP (~' Based on what are believed to be similar Triassic basin occur-rences in the Piedmont area and on the steep magnetic gradient delineating the northwest and southeast edg'es of the basin, it 3 is assumed that at least these sides are bounded by f aults and
,e that the Triassic sediments have been preserved in a down-
\. dropped graben within the basement rock.
The geology and tectonics of South Carolina north of the Savannah River in the. vicinity of the VNP site is very similar in most respects to that in eastern Georgia. Regional geology of South Carolina in the vicinity of the site is illustrated in
\ the accompanying figure 2.5-3A; some details of structure are shown on figure 2.5-3.
The five topographic belts of the Coastal Plain as described in paragraph 2.5.1.2 continue across the Savannah River into South Carolina; however, the two innermost or landward belts are 5 narrower and less well defined. In eastern South Carolina, the Congaree Sand Hills belt is an extension of the Tifton Upland and Fall Line Hills belts of Georgia. In western South Carolina toward the Savannah River, the Aiken Plateau interrupts the trend of the Congaree Sand Hills (Cooke, 1936, figure 1). It is characterized in its more puurly drained and less dissected parts by shallow undrained depressions (" Carolina bays") that appear to be caused by the underground removal of calcareous material occurring as limy facies of the Barnwell or McBean formations. 2.5.1.3.2 Stratigraphy The stratigraphy applicable to the Savannah River basin area is summarized in table 2.5-1. Igneous and metamorphic rocks varying is age from Precambrian to Paleozoic form the lowest unit believed to be present at the site. This material was not encountered during drilling or indicated by the deep refraction seismic work, but is known to form the true basement material by direct or inferred means throughout the Georgia-South Carolina area. 1 l l i i 2.5-3a 7/27/73 Amendment 5 l I
. -.s t-
- .y. , :. . :.:.:
.e . . .s.. ::. .
x . n. s. ; .:s.: :.u.. .. 9,, 4: ; , :
- _____ ,g
.. .M
.t . .
.*.?.~.'~
pn -ct, .g%:i*:....,
.1:;,. __-:
'-:~
^
_+ , :+_ 7 =^-: .
- ~. ..
. ' j'. .,;;), r '; _-: L _ b_:_g EXPL AN ATlCN
;/:'.Q Cb
__= , . . . .. _+: +: .,__ _ _- _- ~ ~ ~ ~
- K.t -: +:h... . { ; ,, l ...- ....
( ,. f l w. [ auousu.ca. :- ... .-::z r .,. ; ,, l,,..,,,,
,k, ^
, .,i p . ,, a ~ . ~
... ,c.
e :. J- V,;T Qe... w .a. . -
._q b '"" ~
E\ c=[ i ., i ......~. N:. :- ; s _+ _ . x, I : .:,: : ;;-- ~~ ' c ~ --~- l
~ i::: 5,.. m (( i ,6., i -, . . . .
SITE ~:-- -
-r.--~..~-~~
, 'N ..... m .
c . . .,,.. c c., ..
. . c . . .u. , .. .. .....
p . . o . . . .. . . . .............,c. t $ t G . < , ...,
. 7 f
l ALVIN W. VOGTLE huCLEAR PLANT UNITS 1,2,3 & 4 REGIONAL GEOLOGY SOUTH CAROLI! ADJACENT TO SITE FIGURE 2.5 3A 739 7/26/73 7/27/73 Amendment
u- =c : :
,4 s '
'N, ,, i,i. t2 ((f '!;I"' J"* s t , . .
+,':
s'!!l l
, 4. ' ,y/r ,%y v i
' n"Il
- . ui.: y
,9#$ 7 /\ &
- no ( T ,
- .ijl"If f ) j,@"a, v li\{
; .~\
? S o
I1
\,.,; I';},p ,t -
l'.,,
.I,.:
i .wly; l-3 ::g.,,J" [e, o 1 o\g.
- . y u , ,
7 , 'I' [ \ g ,
':n 1h !'j! if'.ll'P,I i
~
\/ >
.l o j W
g#h KU69%p i kS$ll g$. y , yJ
?a,s s7 l! ,
M 9 , _. e lgq\((
?',
Qw. vy :I
; ,b gr e s ,,. , s t 1 . :-
~
(,, ..9 1 5
-r
.w yo ;; ' ~
Y' 1
$ bit h y
3x ,
- t. -
a./,-QS N ,/ g O s
) ,, .
r4 $ Y t
VNP I at least post-Claiborne sediments. Although the second
. possibility, seismic activity, is a likely causative force, it also seems probable that the dike itself was formed both by means of infilling, at an equal pace, of overlying material and e by the mechanism included in hypothesis 3. So far as is known, (m there is no material present now in a stratigraphically higher i position in the geologic section and similar in composition to the fracture fill that conceivably might have worked down into the fissure as it was being formed. There is, however, greenish-gray clay in the Hawthorne Formation at downdip localities that could have been present in this area in the k geologic past and would be a likely source for such filling.
There is also sbnilar clay stratigraphically lower in the geologic section - a fact which suggests that possibly some 3 dikes were inj ected up through the younge.r Tertiary rocks. Conceivably this injection may have been brought about by the failure of underlying beds to support compressional stresses. Under such conditions the weight of the overlying material would cause a f ailure in the substructure brought about by ground water solution of the underlying calcareous beds. When these beds could no longer support the overlying formations, fractures would develop as the superstructure collapsed, and
- clastic material below would migrate up into the fractures.
Some corroborative evidence for such an origin is indicated by the large number of solution sinks in the vicinity of the dikes, as for example, in the northeastern quarter of the Ellenton quadrangle. Conversely, dike swarms are indigenous to those areas exhibiting other features of solution and collapse." The Quarternary appears largely represented by the flood plain deposits and valley fill associated with the rivers and larger streams in the~ area. Most of the stratigraphic units occur north of tne Savannah River in South Carolina. The chief difference is the appearance of much more extensive areas underlain by calcareous f acies of the Barnwell formation, as shown in figure. 2.5-3A. These facies are named the Cooper marl and the Santee limestone . (Cooke, 1936, p. 40). The Santee limestone underlies the Cooper marl and appears to be equivalent to the basal part of the Barnwell (Cooke, 1936, p. 72). The Cooper marl may be the 5 same age as the upper part of the Barnwell, although the top of the Barnwell may not be as young as the upper part of the Cooper marl. Recent investigation by Siple (1967) in Aiken and Barnwell Counties, South Carolina, reveals Miocene Hawthorne outliers occurring a considerable distance landward from the main belt of Hawthorne strata as shown in Cooke's 1936 map, approaching 2.5-7 7/27/73 Amendment 5
- - - -__,--.__--,_.--__.______-,--_._-,._,m _ -y-,,,-,,.,,.__,_.,m. _ _ - - ., -,__,,,_.__,____.__,,,,_____o_,m
l l
, VNP
(.' , as near as 8 miles to the outcrop of crystalline basement rocks at the fall line near Augusta, Georgia (see figure 2.5-3A). Similar Hawthorne outliers are also known in Georgia, as is shown in figure 2.5-3. A comparison of figures 2.5-3 and 2.5-3A, which show the site region geology in Georgia and South Carolina, respectively, demonstrates the general similarity and continuity of geology acro'ss the Savannah River. The Tuscaloosa-McBean contact crosses the Savannah River about 14 miles downstream from 5 Augustai the McBean Formation crops out along the Savannah
- s. River at least as far as the site. The isolated patch of oligocene strata (Flint River formation) crops out in the same general area on both sides of the Savannah River. Although the Barnwell Formation is not mapped as a lime at the site locality, the site is nonetheless on the regional strike with limy beds that are believed to be f acies equivalents of the Barnwell Formation, as shown on figure 2.5-3A.
2.5.1.3.3 Structure The major structural trend affecting the Georgia-South Carolina region along the southern portion is the pre-Mesozoic Appalachian system. Tectonic activity had ceased on this system before the caposition of the Cretaceous sediments in the Savannah River valley area, as is evidenced by the lack of tectonic folding or documented fault offsets in the sediments. Faulting, perhaps of major proportions, appears to have occurred in the basement complex during the pre-Cretaceous, however, to account for the down-warped or down-faulted segments of Triassic sediments found preserved within the basament complex throughout much. of the Atlantic Coastal Plain. The coastal plain sediments indicate the Savannah River basin has remained remarkably stable throughout Upper Mesozoic and Cenozoic times. The areas of gentle warping recorded in the Georgia-South Carolina area appear in the coastal zone near the city of Savannah or along the southern border with Florida and do not extend to the vicinity of the site. Studies in conjunction with the SRP inoicate that the Savannah River has been migrating from northeast toward the southwest, leaving a series of well-developea terraces, abandoned meanuers, and flow marking on its South Carolina side. These features, indicative of previous occupation by the river, are missing from the Georgia side throughout tne Burke County area. The relatively straight bluff along the Georgia side of this area appears related to a facies change in whien a hard, bluff-l forming clay marl has replaced a green-gray silty sand found on i 4 e i 2.5-7a 7/27/73 Amendment 5
, ..--.-.---,,,------,.-c.___-,-,,.,--..,-=,-.-...-.-.-.------,_-,._,n, -----,--.,-----,v-
VNP f. t . the SRP. The southwestward migration of the Savannah River has ' l resulted in the undercutting of the marl, formation of the L linear bluff along the Georgia side, and erosion of the marl l facies from the adjacent South Carolina bank. Structural conditions in South Carolina are completely I comparable to those in Georgia. The site is located over the l approximate southern limit of a downfaulted Triassic basin, which extends about 30 miles to the northeast, as outlined in figure 2.5-4A. Tectonic activity associated with the formation l of this basin ceased before the deposition of the Cretaceous (
- l. sediments upon the basin, as is evidenced by the lack of (>
! documented fault offsets in the Cretaceous sediments. If the , ' Triassic sediments be considered part of the basement complex ! upon which the Cretaceous and Tertiary materials were 5 deposited, then the surface of the basement as shown by the structure contours given in figure 2.5-4A descends evenly and , without discontinuity across the Triassic sediments. The only l post-Cretaceous warping recorded north of the Savannah River is the " Great Carolina Ridge" (Cooke, 1936, p. 158) , the axis of, which lies roughly along the North Carolina-South Carolina state line. It is the landward extension of the Cape Fear arch, which formed during the late Eocene time by an arching of !' l the earth's crust. Only the Cretaceous and Eocene sediments are affected by this flexure (Cooke, 193 6, p. 158 ) , indicating that activity along the arch ended before deposition of the
- Miocene blanket of sediments, about 25 million years ago.
r e } 2.5.1.3.4 Ground Water Conditions The thick sequence of alternating beds of sand, clay, marl, and l limestone underlying the Coastal Plain include several areally extensive aquifer systems containing large quantities of ground water, principally under confined conditions. Water enters the permeable sands and limestones, principally by direct infiltration of precipitation in their outcrop areas, and migrates southeasterly along the beds, following the slight 2 regional dip. The nearly impermeable, interbedded clays and i marls confine the water within the aquifers, and artesian , conditions develop. The occurrence of ground water, and its , utilization in the region is discussed in detail in subsection 2.4.13. The principal regional aquifer system that underlies the plant !. site is the permeable sands of the Tuscaloosa formation. Water
- is used from the Tuscaloosa aquifer in a zone approximately
( 60 miles wide down-dip of the Fall Line. Eastward, to the i ' coast,' the Tuscaloosa -aquifer is deep, and ground water supplies are derivec from overlying, younger formations. l l l l 7/27/73 Amendment 5 2.5-7b i l l
1 VNP Unconfined ground water is present near the surface in the 4 Coastal Plain in the outcrop, or recharge areas of each aquifer. 1,ocally, small bodies of perched water are found where there are lenses of clay or other low permeable materials above the water table, retarding the downward movement of l. (. infiltrating precipitation. , Development and use of ground water in the area is
- predominantly by small domestic wells in the shallow, i unconfined zones. Few deep walls or large capacity industrial 2
! or municipal wells are present, and only a small percentage of i the aquifer capacities is realized. Wells in aquifers such as the Tuscaloosa are capable of yields' of 2000 gpm or more. Wells will be constructed in the Tuscaloosa aquifer to provide
~
makeup water for cooling. The amount used will be less than 4000 gpm, which is only a fraction of the aquifer capacity. 4 Quality of ground water in the region is good to excellent. It
- is low in total dissolved solids, and generally suitable for domestic and, industrial uses. -
2.5.1.4 Site Geology 2.5.1.4.1 Topography The site is located on. rolling hills, carved from an upland at about 300 feet elevation. Elevations vary from about 80 feet at the Savannah River to 280 feet on the crest of a knoll above Mathes Pond. Surface drainage is to the Savannah River which borders the site on the northeast, via a dendritic series of creeks and branches that essentially surround the property. Rainfall is relatively evenly distributed on a monthly basis
- and, except during heavy storms, rain tends to soak in rather than run of f. Solutioning of underlying calcareous sands and shells has caused local depressions to form, creating areas of internal drainage. Springs generally emerge at the top of the hard clay marl, causing sapping and headward erosion of the overlying sands and clays and formation of amphitheaters and eventually ravines. Where thick shell deposits are present, small-scale cavernous conditions occur along favored percolation paths. The coalescing of the solution depressions or collapse of these small subterranean channels on the top of the clay marl result in ravines with small drainage areas ~and with amphitheaters at the head like that in which Mathes Pond 1 is located.
i 4 2.5-7c 7/27/73 Amendment 515 i e .. ---,-.--,-,--,,--v--.--c,-, - - . - - - , , . , - . - - - - - - . - , , - , - . - . - - . - . - - - - , - - -- -. - . , - - - - - - - - - . - - - - -
VNP 2.5.1.4.2 Stratigraphy The stratigraphic succession of lithologic units at the site is relatively simple, but designations of formation names are not always in agreement because of the complexity of the strata (see location and details of cross sections on figures 2.5-5 (s through 2.5-9. The site stratigraphy is probably bor.t illustrated by the logs of Holes 147 and 136, both of which were cored with nearly 70 percent recovery to a depth of 300 feet below the ground surface. These holes have surface elevations of 209.5 and (- 226.2, respectively. 1 Elevations Description Ground surface - Upper sand stratum: 185 (+) ~ Beneath a surface veneer of light brown, fine to medium-grained blow sand, the upper unit consists of fine to medium-grained red, silty, subangular sand, uncemented, some local clayey-seams. 185 - 178 (+) ~ Yellow silty to sandy clay, locally pure, as in Hole 136, but more often found as a clayey sand or sand with thin clay layers. This marks the contact between the red sands above and the yellow, clayey and often calcareous, sands below. 178 - 141 (+) ~ Yellow to tan, fine to medium-grained silty to clayey sands with I occasional clay lenses. Calcareous material in the form of shell fragments or occasional shells are common in this interval ( locally. 141 - 135 (+) ~ Shell zone: The material in this zone varies from a hard calcareously cemented sandstone, to a coquina in : 2.5-8
,y ( ,
Table 2A-1 DRILLING STATISTICS (Continued) Number and Type Hole Surface U.D. No. location Depth levation Purpose Type Drilling Samples Taken Remarks: 30 N 1,145,072 85.0* 91.0 Preliminary Standard Pen ASTM None X-ray diffraction E 626,534 Investigation & Rotary Tri-Cone 31 N 1,143,764 210.0' 211.0 Preliminary Standard Pen ASTM None Observe well/X-ray E 625,237 Investigation & Rotary Tri-Cone diffraction 32 N 1,144,784 210.0' 214.0 Preliminary Standard Pen ASTM None Observe well E 623,572 Investigation & Rotary Tri-Cone 33 N 1,146,834 220.0' 238.0 Preliminary Standard Pen ASTM None Observe well/ gamma E 624,864 Investigation & Rotary Tri-Cone logged 34 H 1,147,180 115.08 86.0 Preliminary Standard Pen ASTM None observe well E 624,846 Investigation & Rotary Tri-Cone 35A 70.08 94.4 Preliminary Standard Pen ASTM None
. Investigation & Rotary Tri-Cone DJ $
> 36B 150.0' 98.4 Preliminary Standard Pen ASTM None ~I. Investigation & Rotary Tri-Cone 'O 37 N 1,145,243 210.0' 195.0 Preliminary Standard Pen ASTM None Soil solubility test / E 622,690 Investigation & Rotary Tri-Cone X-ray diffraction / Palco analysis 38 N 1,143,474 270.0' 257 Preliminary Standard Pen ASTM None E 619,772 Investigation & Rotary Tri-Cone 39 N 1,149,703 90.0' 118 Preliminary Standard Pen ASTM None X-ray diffraction E 622,835 Investigation & Rotary Tri-Cone 40 N 1,143,210 250.08 215 Preliminary Standard Pen ASTM None E 621,759 Investigation & Rotary Tri-Cone 41 N 1,142,049 120.08 222.8 Preliminary Standard Pen ASTM None E 628,658 Investigation & Rotery Tri-Cone 42 N 1,143,392 250.0' 210 Preliminary Standard Pen ASTM None Paleo analysis / E 623,553 Investigation & Rotary Tri-Cone carbonate solubility test 42A N 1,143,380 150.08 210.6 Hydrologic Standard Pen ASTM None observe well - 150' E 623,535 Data & Rotary Tri-Cone
Table 2A-1
-a D
-4 DRILLING STATISTICS (Continued)
\
j Number and Type . Hole surface U.D. No. Location Depth Elevation Purpose Type Drilling Sagles Taken Remarks O 428 N 1,143,386 130.0' 210.4 Mydrologic Standard Pen AS'I?t None Genuna logged / observe U E 623,544 Data & Rotary Tri-Cone well - 130' m 42C 'N 1,143,398 90.0' 210 Nydrologic Standard Pen ASTM None Gamma logged / observe , a E 623,563 Data & Rotary Tri-Cone well - 90' tt , 42D. N 1,143,403 70.0' 209.7 Hydrologic Standard Pen ASTM None Observe well - 70' E 623,571 Data & Rotary Tri-Cone 42E N 1,143,408 55.0' 209.6 Hydrologic Standard Pen ASTM None observe well - 55' E 623,500 Data & potary Tri-Cone 43 N 1,144,314 55.0' 282.8 Preliminary Standard Pen ASTM None E 621,810 Investigation & Rotary Tri-Cone M
> 44 N 1,146,517 90.0' 241.3 Preliminary Standard Pen ASTM None 4 E 623,911
[ Investigation & Rotary Tri-Cone g 45 18,300' 370.0' 273.52 Preliminary Standard Pen ASTM None Gamma logged /Paleo NE of 36 Investigation & Rotary Tri-Cone analysis ' 101 N 1,142,945 100.0' 210.0 Plant Standard Pen ASTM None E 623,517 Foundation & notary Tri-Cone 101A N 1,142,950 100.0' 210.6 U.D. Samples Rotary Tri-Cone 3* Denison-16 Observe well to 200' E 623,515 for peactor Denison & Shelby 3" Shelby-12 Foundation 1018 ,20' North of 65.0' 210.8 aulk Sample 24' Auger None 24-inch diameter . 101 (100 lb) bucket auger holes drilled adjacent to existing logged j holes solely'for ] the purpose of ob-5 taining bulk soils samples from speci-fic depthe for testing. 102 N 1,142,796 200.0' 211.5 Plant Standard Pen ASTM None E 623,727 Foundation & Rotary Tri-Cone 1 't m r #~. .~ (- - y
Table 2A-1 DRILLING STATISTICS (Continued) Number and Type Hole Surface U.D. No. Incation Depth Elevation Purpose Type Drilling Samples Taken Renarks: 102A Adjacent to 177.0' 211.5 Plant Standard Pen ASTM Denison-15 102 Foundation Dension & Dotary Tri-Cone 103 N 1,142,796 100.0' 212.4 Plant Standard Pen ASTM None E 623,927 Foundation 104 N 1,143,184 100.0' 217.1 Plant Standard Pen ASTM None E 623,398 Foundation & Rotary N 'O >s m W -J \ w -J N 4 (J 9 in D O. 3 to D tt en D
e f, 1 (- \
\ .
N-
~
Table 2A-1 DRILLING STATISTICS (Continued) Number and Type Nole Surface . U.D. No. location ' Depth Elevation Purpose Type Drilling Samples Taken pesarks: 104A Adjacent to 200.0' 217.1 U.D Samples Rotary Tri-Cone, Shelby-5 0104 for Reactor Stan. Pen ASTM, Denison-6 Foundation Shelby & Denison U.D. Samplee from 100' to 200'
- Standard Pen ASTM w/ Intermittent Denison Samples 105 11 1,142,996 300.0' 209.7 Reactor Standard Pen ASTM None E 623,626 Foundation & Rotary Tri-Cone 106 N 1,142,996 150.0' 209.6 Plant Standard Pen ASTM None y E 623,726 Foundation & Rotary Tri-Cone 4
107 14 1,142,996 E 623,876 300.0' 209.4 Reactor Foundation Standard Pen ASTM
& Rotary Tri-Cone None Gamme 1499e4 h N
107A N 1,142,999 300.0' 209.4 U.D. Samples Rotary Tri-Cone Denison-20 E 623,891 for Reactor & Denison Foundation 1078 20' North of 65.0' 209.4 Bulk Sample 24" Auger Hone 24-inch diameter 107 (100 lb) bucket auger holes
-J drilled adjacent N to existing logged M holes solely for 5
(
-a the purpose of ob-taining bulk soils t.s samples from speci-fic depthe for testing.
h 108 N 1,142,996 100.0' 210.2 Plant Standard Pen ASTM None IL E 624,026 Foundation & Rotary Tri-Cone U O 109 N 1,143,405 200.0* 216.0 Plant Standard Pen ASTM None E 623,357 Foundation & Rotary Tri-Cone tn 110 N 1,143,385 100.0' 213.5 Plant Standard Pen ASTM None E 623,504 Foundation & Rotary Tri-Cone 4 e
i,- f'. . T Table 2A-1 DRILLING STATISTICS (Continued) . Nunber and Type not. Surface u.D. No. Iocation Depth Elevation Purpose Type Drilling Samples Taken pesarks: 111 N 1,143,256 200.0' 207.2 Turbine Standard Pen ASTM Denison-4 . E 623,726 Foundation Denison, Shelby & Shelby-10 motary Tri-cone 111A Adjacent to 14 2.0' 207.2 Turbine Botary Tri-Cone 4" Denison-3 , 111 Foundation Denison 112 N 1,143,256 100.0' 204.3 Turbine Standard Pen ASTM None E 623,876 Foundation & Botary Tri-Cone N I 4 M -J N . u 4 \ 4 ha o D O. B 6) D rt un
Table 2A-1 DRILLING STATISTICS (Continued) Number and Type stole Surface U.D. 44 o . Location Depth Elevation Purpose Type Drilling Samples Taken Remarks: 113 N 1,143,156 200.0' 203.1 Turbine Standard Pen ASTM None E 624,026 Foundation & Rotary Tri-Cone . 114 N 1,143,504 200.0' 212.0 Plant Standard Pen ASTM' Denison-4 Carbonate E 623,526 Foundation Denison, Shelby & Shelby-10 solubility test Rotary Tri-Cone 114A Adjacent to 155.0' 212.0 Plant Standard Pen ASTM 4" Denison-3 114 Foundation Dension, Potary Tri-Cone 115 N 1,143,506 100.08 208.5 Plant Standard Pen ASTM None E 623,726 Foundation & Rotary Tri-Cone 116 N 1,143,503 200.0' 208.0 Plant Standard Pen ASTM Mone carbonate E 623,928 Foundation & Rotary Tri-Cone solubility test
;p 117 N 1,143,940 100.0' 197.8 Intake Tunnel Standard Pen ASTM None I E 624,343 Foundation & Rotary Tri-Cone to 'El ,
118 N 1,144,449 100.0' 198.0 Intake Tunnel Standard Pen ASTM None E 624,961 Foundation & Rotary Tri-Cone 119 N 1,144,966 100.0' 117.76 Intake Tunnel Standard Pen ASTM leone E 625,639 & Rotary Tri-Cone 120t N 1,145,310 100.0' 86.8 Intake Stru. Standard Pen ASTM Mone E 626,389- Foundation & Rotary Tri-Cone 121 N 1,145,472 200.0' 88.8 Intake Stru. Standard Pen ASTM None Observe well to 88' E 626,200 Foundation & Rotary Tri-Cone 122 N 1,145,719 100.0' 111.4 Intake Stru. Standard Pen ASTM' Mone E 625,884 Foundation & Rotary Tri-Cone 123 N 1,146,101 200.0' 89.3 Intake Stru. Standard Pen ASTM None E 625,843 Foundation & Rotary Tri-Cone 124 N 1,141,896 200.0' 260.2 Cooling Tower Standard Pen. ASTM None observe well to top q E 623,527 Foundation & Rotary Tri-Cone of Marl /camma Logged 125 N 1,142,156 100.0' 248.1 Cooling Tower Standard Pen A3TM Ilone E 624,027 Foundation & Rotary Tri-Cone O m m . .-. j g-e
, , . -e -e- 9
Table 2A-1 - DRILLING STATISTICS (Continued) Number and Type Hole Surface U.D. No. Incation Depth Elevation Purpose Type Drilling Samples Taken Remarks: 126 N 1,142,997 100.0' 241.4 Cooling Tower Standard Pen ASTM None E 625,306 Foundation & Rotary Tri-Cone 127 N 1,144,206 100.0' 199.2 Switchyard Standard Pen ASTM None E 623,176 Foundation & Rotary Tri-Cone 128 N 1,144,206 100.0' 198.0 Switchyard Standard Fen ASTM None E 623,876 Foundation & Rotary Tri-Cone 129 N 1,143,856 100.0' 215.9 Switchyard Standard Pen ASTM None Observe well to top E 623,576 Foundatior. & Rotary Tri-Cone of Marl 130 N 1,142,796 100.0' 209.6 Plant Standard Pen ASTM None E 623,527 Foundation & Rotary Tri-Cone 131 N 1,143,256 100.0' 213.6 Plant Standard Pen ASTM None E 623,576 Foundation & Rotary Tri-Cone M > 132 N 1,144,988 150.0' 169.5 Intake Stru. Standard Pen ASTM None I E 626,154 Bluff Slope M
- & Rotary Tri-Cone Z Stability 9 133 N 1,145,146 150.0' 155.0 Intake Stru. Standard Pen ASTM None E 626,089 Foundation & Rotary Tri-Cone 134 N 1,146,750 200.0' 191.3 Geologic-- Standard Pen ASTM None E 621,024 Fill-in & Rotary Tri-Cone -
Section Between B16 5 837 135 N 1,143,992 200.0' 200.5 Geologic-- Cored w/NWM None Observe well to E 622,742 Depression Barrel Face - below Marl / carbonate Investigation discharge bit solubility test 136 N 1,142,996 '300.08 209.5 Geologic-- Cored w/4x5-1/2 None Gamma Logged / E 623,849 Center of barrel, F-D bit carbonate Reactor solubility test 137 p 1,144,839 200.0' 230.6 Unit 1 Cored w/NWM None Observe well to top E 622,117 Geologic barrel, F-D bit of Marl / Gamma Logged / Depression Carbonate Investigation solubility test
Tablo 2A 1 DRILLING STATISTICS (Continued) 4 4 Number and Type
\ Nole Surface U.D.
No. location Depth Elevation Purpose, Type Drilling Samples Taken pesarks: 138 N 1,143,000 99.5' 225.2 . Reactor Fdn Standard Pen ASTM None Observe well to top w E 622,500 Units 3 s 4 & notary Tri-Cone of Marl 3' 138A N 1,142,966 200.0' 224.9 U.D. Samples Rotary Tri-Cone, 4" Denison-17 3 E 622,509 for peactor Denison s Shelby 3* Shelby-15 Q Foundation h m 139 N 1,142,996 E 623,526 300.0' 210.9 Geologic Hole Edge of Cored w/4x5-1/2 barrel, P-D Bit None Canuma Logged / Carbonate
.3 Reactor solubility test rt Unit 2 M 140 N 1,142,846 96.0' 222.4 Units 3 & 4 Standard Pen ASTM None . Observe well to E 622,702 & Rotary Tri-Cone Marl - 96.0' 141 N 1,142,860 105.0' 230.4 Units 3 s 4 Standard Pen ASTM None Observe well to E 622,293 6 Rotary Tri-Cone Marl - 105.0' N 142 N 1,14 3,2 83 105.0' 231.2 Units 3 & 4 Standard Pen ASTM None Observe well to
{ y 143 E 622,262 N 1,143,283 88.5' 224.5 Units 3 & 4 s Rotary Tri-Cone Standard Pen ASTM None Marl - 95.0' Observe well to ( E 622,738 & notary Tri-Cone Marl - 88.5' 144 N 1,145,403 48.5' 103.2 Intake Struc. Standard Pen ASTM None Observe well to E 626,124 & Rotary Tri-Cone 48.5' 144A N 1,145,406 51.0' 103.9 2ntake Strue. Rotary Tri-Cone 3" Denison-14 E 626,133 s Denison ) 145 N 1,142,792 192.0' 218.7 Coologic - In Cored w/NNM None Camuna Logged / E 621,063 Depression barrel, F-D Bit Observe well to Marl - 82.0' 146 N 1,142,966 300.0' 209.6 Seismic Shot Rotary Tri-Cone None This hole was drilled E 623,750 Nole with a tri-cone rotary drill bit only and not logged as it was inten-ded for use in cross- 5 hole seismic studies. The hole was located adjacent to carefully cored holes 8136 or 9139 (see figure 2.5-10). i h / w k __ _ _ _ _ _ ___U
u
,, .- ~
r -
~ ,.
Table 2A-1 DRILLING STATISTICS (Continued) . l
- uumber and Type Hole Surface U.D.
No. Location Depth Elevation Purpose Type Drilling 3emples Taken monarkes 147 N 1,142,975 300.0' 22G.2 Geologic cored w/4x5-1/2 Nome Casuna ,Ingged/ Observe E 662,471 Investigation barrel, F-D mit well to 300.0'/ Unite 3 & 4 carbonate soldklity test 148 N 1,142,996 300.0' 209.0 seismic Shot notary Tri-cone Mone This hole was drilled E 623,814 Hole with a tri-cone rotary drill bit only and not logged as it was inten-ded for use in crose-hole setemic studies. 5 l It was located J 4 adjacent to carefully cored holee 0136 or g 0139 (see figure 2.5-10) . 1
-a O
W
\
to 4
\
4 ta M , 9 m U On 3 m ' U tt un
=
Table 2A--1 l DRILLING STATISTICS (Continued) l Number and Type ; Hole Surface U.D. l No. Incation Depth Elevation Purpose Type Drilling Samples Taken Remarks 149 N 1,142,996 300.0' 209.2 Seismic Shot Rotary Tri-Cone None This hole was drilled l E 623,779 Hole with a tri-cone rotary l drill bit only and not l logged as it was inten-ded for use in cross-hole seismic studies. ' The hole was located l adjaoest to carefully ' l oored holee $136 or ! 0139 (see figure 2.5-10). 150 N 1,142,996 170.0' 210.3 Seismic Shot Rotary Tri-Cone None This hole was drilled E 623,556 Hole with a tri-cone rotary drill bit only and not oa logged as it was inten. 5 ye ded for use in crose- M i hole seismic studies. Z F# The hole was located M8 E' adjacent to carefully cored holes 0136 or
$139 (see figure 2.5-10).
151 N 1,142,946 300.0' 210.4 Seismic Shot notary Tri-Cone None This hole was drilled E 623,849 Hole with a tri-cone rotary drill bit only and not
,a logged as it was inton-g ded for use in crose-da hole seismic studies. -J The hole was located 's adjacent to carefully 'J cored holes $136 or 'd 0139 (see figure 2.5-10) .
[ 152 N 1,133,831 200.0' 152.7 Geologic Hole Cored w/NWM None Paleo analysis O E 633,344 to Complete barrel, F-D Bit U Sect. between I Pit. Site & h" p Griffin Landing tt 153 N 1,143,080 89.5' 226.2 Determine Rotary Tri-Cone pone l" E 622,125 Depth of Bearing . Horizon
Table 2A-1 DRILLING STATISTICS (Continued) Number and Type Mole Surface U.D. No. Incation Depth Elevation Purpose Type Drilling Samples Taken Renarket 154 N 1,142,796 300.0' 209.5 solenic Shot notary Tri-Cone Mone Gaouse Imgged E 623,049 Nole . 155 N 1,143,332 86.7' 226.0 Determine
- Rotary Tri-Cone None E 621,470 Depth of tear-ing Morison i
156 N 1,131,584 260.0' 237.7 Geologic cored w/NNM None E 642,340 Mole - Griffin barrel F-D Bit Landing
- 157 N 1,145,605 104.1' 207.6 Geologic Mole Cored w/NNM None Filled with Gravel E 621,598 barrel F-D Bit to 149.5' for 4 p Facker Test g 38
* 'If i 158 N 1,143,030 72.0' 213.0 Determine Rotary Tri-Cone Mono
- E 622,066 Depth to Boar-ing Morison
[ 159 N 1,14 3,9 31 80.2' 222.2 Determine notary Tri-Cone Mone E 622,401 Depth.to Bear-ing Morison 4
\
N 4
\
a W b:I . m U 0, 3 m D tt us N
Table 2A-1 DRILLING STATISTICS (Continued) Number and Type pole Surface U.D. No. Location Depth Elevation Purpose Type Driljing Samples Taken Remarks: 160 N 1,144,157 78.08 213.7 Determine Rotary Tri-Cone None , E 622,625 Depth to Bear-ing Norizon 161 N 1,144,102 65.08 201.0 Determine 7 Rotary Tri-Cone Mone
,E 622,899 Depth of Bear-ing Norizon -
162 N 1,144,977 90.0' 235.5 Determine Rotary Tri-Cone None E 622,318 Depth to Bear-ing Horizon 1 163 N 1,144,748 95.0' 238.6 Determine Rotary Tri-Cone Mone E 621,985 Depth to Bear-ing Horizon M 4 }' 164 N 1,145,401 145.0' 103.2 Seismic Shot Rotary Tri-Cone None Gamma Logged gg ps E 626,120 Hole - Intake y w 165 N 1,145,354 155.0' 112.2 Seismic Shot Rotary Tri-Cone Mone E 626,138 Hole - Intake 166 N 1,145,215 185.0' 143.1 Seismic Shot Rotary Tri-Cone None ] E 626,194 Hale - Intake t 167 N 1,145,388 145.0' 104.6 Seismic Shot Rotary Tri-Cone Mone E 626,087 Hole - Intake ' 168 N 1,145,375 147.0' 105.8 Seismic Shot Rotary Tri-Cone None E 626,055 Hole - Intake I 169 N 1,145,364 147.0' 106.5 Seismic Shot Rotary Tri-Cone None E 626,027 Hole - Intake 170 N 1,142,988 180.08 228.3 Packer Test Rotary Tri-Cone Mone Packer Test E 622,440 171 N 1,143,420 90.0' 223.1 Deept Seismic Rotary Tri-Cone None E 621,944 Shot Hole l 172 N 1,143,452 90.0' 224.1 Deep Seismic Rotary Tri-Cone pone E 621,959 Shot Nole O
p p Table 2A-1 DRILLING STATISTICS (Continued)
- Number and Type Hole Surface U.D.
No. Location Depth Elevation Purpose Type Drilling Samples Taken Itemarzo 173 N 1,141,664 80.0' 188.6 Deep Seismic potary Tri-Cone None E 626,629 Shot Nole 174 N 1,141,691 89.0' 189.0 Deep Seismic Rotary Tri-Cone None E 626,642 Shot Hole 175 N 1,143,386 165.0' 233.1 Investigate Standard Pen ASTM None Gamma Imgged/ Observe E 621,363 Geologic & Rotary Tri-Cone well Set to 165.0' a
. Anomaly 176 N 1,142,117 80.0' 196.4 Water Rotary Tri-Cone None observe well to 75.0' E 625,423.0'5 Observation well y 177 N 1,143,560 80.0' 213.0 Water Rotary Tri-Cone None Observe well to 80.0' I E 624,865 Observation P well f
*G 178 N 1,144,958 93.0' 240.4 Water Rotary Tri-Cone None Observe well to 91.0' E 622,994 Observation well 179 N 1,144,059 133.0' 274.8 Water Rotary Tri-Cone None Observe well to E 621,779 Observation 131.0'
( bJ well j q 180 N 1,142,965 162.0' 210.1 Packer Test notary Tri-Cone Mene Packer Test N E 623,724
-J W 181' N 1,143,744 200.0' 258.3 Investigate Standard Pen ASTM None Observe Hole 200'/
p E 620,833 Geologic & Rotary Tri-Cone Gaeuma Ingged 3 Anomaly (D D 182 N 1,144,232.0'4 220.0' 260.4 Investigate Standard Pen ASTM None g E 620,820 Geologic Anomaly
& Rotary Tri-Cone g , D I et L.D m
9
Table 2A-1 DRILLING STATISTICS (Continued)
~
Number and Type IIole Sorface U.D. No. Location Depth Elevation Purpose Type Drilling Samples Taken Remarks:
- 183 N 1,143,026.0'4 60.0' 210.8 Water Rotary Tri-Cone None Observe well to 60.0' E 623,526 Observation This hole was drilled well only as observation well for the shallow aquifer and was sched-uled on the basis of data from adjacent logged holes (see figure 2.5-10). 5 104 N 1,142,996 65.0' 209.4 Water Rotary Tri-Cone None observe well to 65.0' E 623,906 Observation This hole was drilled well only as observation M well for the shallow
> aquifer and was sched- 9 8 uled on the basis of [ p data from adjacent logged holes (see figure 2.5-10). 4 \ M ^ 4 \ -a b.7 <D 3 O, 3 (D D
- . . ._. =__ . - . . __ _ _ _ _ _ . Table 2A-1 DRILLING STATISTICS (Continued) Number and Type Hole Surface U.D. No. Location Depth Elevation Purpose Type Drliling Samples Taken Remarks: 200 N 1,142,860 100.0' 209.0 Aux. Bldg. Standard Pen ASTM, Shelby-2 E 623,560 Foundation Rotary Tri-Cone, Flight Auger, Shelby 201 N 1,142,860 100.0' 211.4 Aux. Bldg. Rotary Tri-Cone, Shelby-1 E 623,740 Foundation - Std. Pen ASTM, Shelby 202 N 1,142,710 155.7' 215.5 Emergency Flight Auger, Std. Shelby-8 E 623,380 Cooling Pen ASTM, Shelby, Denison-8 Tower Denison Foundation 203 N 1,142,730 154.8' 210.9 Railroad Plant Rotary Tri-Cone, Shelby-8 E 623,650 Entrance Std. Pen ASTM, Denison-8 Foundation Shelby, Denison to 4 204 N 1,142,710 156.0' 212.8 Emergency Rotary Tri-Cone, Shelby-7 Z { p E 623,910 Cooling Std. Pen ASTM, Denison-8 'O A Tower Fdn Shelby, Denison 205 N 1,143,310 100.0' 212.0 Turbine Rotary Tri-Cone, None E 623,240 Foundation Std. Pen ASTM 206 N 1,143,310 99.5' 204.0 Turbine Rotary Tri-Cone, None E 623,900 Foundation Std. Pen ASTM 207 N 1,143,220 100.5' 212.3 Cooling Tower Rotary Tri-Cone, None E 624,560 Foundation Std. Pen ASTM 208 N 1,143,220 90.5' 218.1 Cooling Tower Rotary Tri-Cone, None E 625,070 Foundation Std. Pen ASTM 209 N 1,143,220 99.4' 216.2 Cooling Tower Rotary Tri-Cone, None E 625,586 Foundation Std. Pen ASTM 210 N 1,142,600 101.08 216.9 Cooling Tower Rotary Tri-Cone, None E 624,560 Foundation Std. Pen ASTM 211 N 1,142,680 101.5' 219.0 Cooling Tower Rotary Tri-Cone None E 625,070 Foundation Std. Pen ASTM
* # * / *g [ - ,
= - * - - + = = . - .-m -- ....w . . ,,m. -+ e.- + - .m..g-- = =*
VNP x AEC Question 2.23 Provide those boring logs of holes drilled in the proposed plant ar,ea that were not submitted in the PSAR. For example, the logs for drill holes 101B, 107B, 146, 148, 149, 150, 151,
- s. 183, and 184, which are located in the containment buildings locations, were not provided in the PSAR.
5
Response
~
There are no logs for the subject holes because these holes were drilled for obtaining limited information only for a special purpose as stated in table 2A-1 and therefore no permanent log was intended. 2.23 7/27/73 Amendment 5
4 i VNP
.(
- AEC Ouestion 2.24 Discuss the significance and magnitude of possible subsidence resulting from fluid withdrawal by means of the proposed water wells that will supply normal make-up water and cooling water during emergency shutdown conditions. Verify your estimate of fs ,
5 the magnitude of subsidence by providing the appropriate ; analyses. .
' Response The answer to this question is provided in paragraph 2.4.13.1.3.3E. -
i s ( w f i l ( i i t (. 7/27/73 Amendment 5 2.24 l L
VNP s. AEC Ouestion 2.25 In order to complete the geologic and tectonic framework for the proposed site, describe and discuss the geology to the f north of the Savannah River, using as guidelines the " Seismic
\- and Geologic Siting Criteria" and the " Standard Format and Content of SARs for Nuclear Power Plants." Show in an appropriate figure the extent and locations of the nearby Triassic Basin and clastic dikes mentioned on page 2.5-6.
5 Re spon se The geology to the north of the Savannah River and the extent and location of the nearby Triassic Basin and clastic dikes are discussed in paragraphs 2.5.1.3.1, 2.5.1.3.2, and 2.5.1.3.3, which were included in Amendment 4. The geologic map covering the area north of the Savannah River and based on existing 2.5.1.a.2, geologic data is provided in paragraphs 2.5.1.3.1, and 2.5.1.3.3, and figure 2.5-3A. 2.25 7/27/73 Amendment 5
VNP AEC Question 2.2s The Regulatory Position regarding the site foundation exploration for the Vogtle Nuclear Plant is as follows: In the Vogtle site exploration program a large number of . borings were deployed over a large area of investigation. Although we and our consultants, the Corps of Engineers, agree that the general geologic conditions at the site are basically as described in the PSAR, we believe that more specific details of the foundation conditions, pertinent to design, may have been overlooked. due to the wide spacing of the borings covering the critical structure locations. Specifically, some solutioning of the calcareous clay bearing stratum cannot be ruled out, because of its heterogeneous interlayering of sand .and fractured limestone which could have created solution channels, as evidenced at times by partial or complete loss of drilling fluid in the marl. We and our consultants therefore recommend 'that, f'or the 5 containment buildings locations, additional borings be placed on a minimum grid of 50 feet on centers'and that they penetrate at least 40 feet of fresh, unweathered marl stratum. Other, less heavy category I structures should have an average boring spacing of not more than 100 feet on centers, depending upon the reliance that can be placed on geologic interpretation between borings. An appropriate number of samples should be recovered from these borings and tested to demonstrate the high bearing capacities represented in Table 2.5-2 of the PSAR, the low compressibility characteristics, and that the upper 15' to 20' of the marl can adequately support the heavy structures. The applicant has assigned the mechanism causing surface depres sions (sinkholes) to the erosion of the shell bed above the marl bearing stratum. The applicant should provide assurance that the control. mechanism for creating sinkholes is due to this entirely, and not in part to deep seated leaching , and consolidation of the soils below the bearing stratum. We, i therefore, recommend that the applicant correlate in detail the geometry, locations, and amount of depression of the sinkholes with the extent and thickness of the shell bed; and provide a j detailed discussion of the geomorphology of the area. The j additional borings recommended above will provide valuable data / j in this regard, also. (. l l Re spon se The answer to this question will be submitted later. ( l 7/27/73 Amendment 5 2.26 l
VNP p. AEC Question 3.26 - Specify the allowable value of tangential shear that can be 3 resisted by concrete alone in a prestressed concrete structure and indicate the reinforcement that will be provided to carry A the shear in excess of the allowable.
Response
5 The answer to this question is provided in paragraph 3.8.1.4.5. 1 l 3.26 7/27/73 Anendment 5
- - __.,4 , , ,_ _ . - - - - . , --.y, - - , _ - , , _ .
l *
- e s
- WP . ,
AEC Question 3.27 Submit a list of co=puter programs that will be used in structural and seismic analyses to determine stresses and deformations of Seismic Cate-gory I structures. Include a.brief description of each program and the extent of its_ application. 3
Response
Refer to revised appendix 3F-1 for response to this question. [
\
/
s k. ( 7/6/73 Amendment 3 3.27
t Cudom
, UNITED STATES g,j $ - 2,)6 1 a ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION
*l *
- WASHINGTON. D.C. 20545 Docket Nos. 50-424 June 12, 1973 50-425 50-426 50-427 o
Georgia Power Company ATTN: Mr. I. S. Mitchell, III Vice President and Secretary P. O. Box 4545 Atlanta, Georgia 30302 Centleman: In order that we may continue our review of your application for a license to construct the Alvin W. Vogtle Nuclear Plant, Units 1, 2, 3, and 4; additional information is required. The specific information required is listed in the enclosure. It is grouped by sections that correspond to the relevant sections of the Preliminary Safety Analysis Report. Our tentative review schedule is based on the assumption that this additional information will be available for our review by July 27, 1973. If you cannot meet this date, please inform us within 7 days after receipt of this letter so that we may revise our scheduling.
$ Please contact us if you desire any discussion or clarification of the material requested.
Sincerely, ,
.. - / ,-
Karl Kniel, 011ef
, Pressuri::ed Water Reactors Branch No. 2 Directorate of Licensing
Enclosure:
Request for Additional Information ces : Listed on page 2
??O && .
y - ,--
Georgia Power Company ces: Southern Services, Inc. ATIN: Mr. Ruble A. Thomas Vice President P. O. Box 2625 Birmingham, Alabama 35202 Mr. George F. Trowbridge, Esquire , Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge 910 17th Street, NW Washington, D. C. 20006 4 4 6 1
't o-9
e . 2-8 REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION GEORGIA POWER COMPANY ALVIN W. VOCTLE NUCLEAR PIANT UNITS 1, 2, 3, AND 4 DOCKET NOS. 50-424, 50-425, 50-426 AND 50-42 7 2.0 SITE CHARACTERISTICS 2.23 Provide those boring logs of holes drilled in the proposed plant area that were not submitted in the PSAR. For example, the logs for drill holes 101B,107B,146,148,149,150, 151,183, and 184, which are located in the containment buildings locations, were not provided in the PSAR. 2.24 Discuss the significance and magnitude of possible subsidence resulting from fluid withdrawal by means of the proposed water wells that will supply normal make-up water and cooling water during emergency shutdown conditions. Verify your estimate of the magnitude of subsidence by providing the appropriate analyses. 2.25 In order to complete the geologic and tectonic framework for the proposed site, describe and discuss the geology to the north of the Savannah River, using as guidelines the
" Seismic and Geologic Siting Criteria" and the " Standard Format and Content of SARs for Nuclear Power Plants."
Show in an appropriate figure the extent and locations of the nearby Triassic Basin and clastic dikes mentioned on page 2.5-6. 2.26 The Regulatory Postion regarding the site foundation exploration for the Vogtle Nuclear Plant is as follows: In the Vogtle site exploration program a large number of borings were deployed over a large area of investigation. Although we and our consultants, the Corps of Engineers, agree that the general geologic conditions at the site are basically as described in the PSAR, we believe that more specific details of the foundation conditions, pertinent to design, may have been overlooked due to the wide spacing of the borings covering the critical structure locations.
2-9 Specifically, some solutioning of the calcareous clay bearing stratum cannot be ruled out, because of its heterogeneous interlayering of sand and fractured limestone which could have created solution channels, as evidenced at times by partial or complete loss of drilling fluid in the. marl. We and our consultants therefore recommend that, for the containment buildings locations, additional borings be placed on a miniassa grid of 50 feet on centers and that they penetrate at least 40 feet of fresh, unweathered marl stratum. O the r, less heavy Category I structures should have an average boring spacing of not more than 100 feet on centers, depending upon the reliance that can be placed on geologic interpreta-tion between borings. An appropriate number of samples should be recovered from these borings and tested to demon-strate the high bearing capacities represented in Table 2.5-2 of the PSAR, the~ low compressibil'ity characteristics, and that the upper 15' to 20' of the marl can adequately support the heavy structures. The applicant has assigned the mechanism causing surface
, depressions (sinkholes) to the erosion of the shell bed above the marl bearing stratum. The applicant should provide assurance that the control mechanism for creating sinkholes is due to this entirely, and not in part to deep seated leaching and consolidation of the soils below the bearing
. stratum. We, therefore, recommend that the applicant correlate in detail the geometry, locations, and amount of depression of the sinkholes with the extent and thickness of the shell bed; and provide a detailed discussion of the geomeirphology of the area. The additional borings recommended above will provide valuable data in this regard, also.
O l
3-19 REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION GEORGIA POWER COMPANY ALVIN W. V0GTLE NUCLEAR PLANT UNITS 1. 2. 3. AND 4 DOCKET NOS. 50-424, 50-425, 50-426 AND 50-427 3.0 DESIGN OF STRUCTURES. COMPONENTS. EQUIPMENT AND SYSTEMS 3.32 The material in Section 3.6 covering protection against postulated pipe rupture inside containment is not definitive enough to deter-7 mine whether the protection criteria is adequate and how protection will actually be accomplished. The AEC staff position on protection against pipe whip inside containment is contained in Regulatory Guide 1.46. Provide criteria consistent with Regulatory Guide 1.46. 3.33 Provide the design criteria to be employed to assure that high energy , ! fluid piping systems outside containment will comply with General Design Criterion #4. An acceptable method for compliance would be physical separation or isolation of high energy piping systems from other systems, structures or components important to safety. Indicate how Vogtle Units 1, 2, 3 and 4 will achieve compliance. f 3.34 With regard to the techniques to be utilized for determination of required protection against pipe whip inside containment provide: 3.34.1 A description of the methods used to' calculate the time functions of: (a) the jet thrust force on the ruptured pipe, and (b) the jet impingement force on a distant object. 3.34.2 A summary of the dynamic analysis methods used c:,: (a) Verify the design adequacy of pipe whip restraints, and 1 (b) Verify that the motion of unrestrained, ruptured piping will not damage to an unacceptable degree structures, systems or components which are important to safety.
3-20 3.35 Clarify your intention to perform a confirmatory type preoperational vibration test for reactor internals on all units of the Vogtle plant using Indian Point 2 as the designated prototype. Identify any design differences between Vogtle and Indian Point 2 which may lead to different response behavior of the reactor internal structures under flow-induced vibration. In addition, provide a description of the preoperational vibration test program intended for the Vogtle
. plant. If the elements of the intended test program differ substantially from those recommended in AEC Safety Guide 20, submit the basis and justification for these diffarences.
3.36 Clarify your intention to provide a description of the dynamic system analysis methods and procedures that will be used to confirm the structural design adequacy of the reactor coolant system (unaffected loops) and the reactor internals (including fuel element assemblies,
.- control rod assemblies and drives) under the IACA loading, or identify the applicable topical report that provides this description.
3.37 The design stress limits for ASME Class 1, 2 and 3 components 3 listed in Section 3.9.2 (Subsections 3.9.2.3, 3.9.2.4 and 3.9.2.9), the stress limit and load combination criteria of Tables 3.6-8 and 3.6-9 of the PSAR and Sections 3.9 and 5.2 of RESAR-3 are not accept-able. Regulatory Guide 1.48 provides a summary of limits which are acceptable to the regulatory staff. Unless you propose to adopt these design limits, provide the bases for using any limits that c
- exceed those listed in Regulatory Guide 1.48 and demonstrate the <
adequacy of the design safety margins proposed. 3.38 The position stated in Section 3.9.2.5 of the PSAR regarding the use of Code Cases for ASME Class 2 and 3. components is not acceptable. , It is noted that RESAR-3 provides no indication as to the use of l Code Cases for ASME Class I congonents. The use of ASME Code Cases ! for all classes of construction requires specific approval by the l Cosutission in accordance with 10 CFR 50.55a (refer to (a)(2) 11 and ) footnote 6 of the regulation). Provide a list of the Code Cases desired to be used. 3.39 Section 3.7.2.1.1.3 of th'e PSAR implies that dynamic analysis alone {- is one of the methods of evaluation to qualify mechanical equipment. i Provide the specific criteria that will be used to guarantee operability of mechanical equipment under f aulted condition loads when a dynamic, analysis without performance testing is employed in the design of this equipment. I a l
)
~
3-21 3.40 Section 3.9.1.1 of the PSAR presents a partially acceptable basis to confirm the structural design of the piping and piping restraints. Attachment I, entitled "Preoperational Piping Dynamic Effects Test Program," presents the basis for a program which is complete and which would be acceptable at the Operating Licensing stage. State your intentions to develop such a program for submittal in the FSAR for the Vogtle Nuclear Plant, Units 1, 2, 3 and 4. 3.41 Provide a detailed description of an operability assurance program for confirming that ASME Class 1, 2 and 3 active
- valves 2 inches and greater in nominal pipe size will function properly under normal, emergency and faulted plant conditions.** This program may include either the in-situ application of vibratory devices to superimpose 1 the vibratory loadings on the valve operator and associated mounted devices, or laboratory or shop testing under equivalent simulated-
'g loadings that will ensure valve operability. The test program may be based upon selectively testing a representative number of active valves in the piping system according to valve type, accident load level, size, etc. on a prototype basis.
3.42 Sections 3.9.2.8 of the PSAR and 5.2.2 of RESAR-3 covering the design of pressure relieving stations in seismic Category 1 piping 1 systems are not acceptable in that design for dynamic effects is not , covered. Your response should include the method of determining the discharge thrust load including'all dynamic effects and the method
- of stress evaluation for open and closed systems. Design should be performed using a standard dynamic hydraulic / structural analysis i ,
or,, alternatively, the equivalence of the method used should be l justified and the adequacy of the design safety margins that are proposed should be. deuonstrated. d l 3.43 Provide the basis for the selection of allowable stresses as listed in Table 5.2-6 of RESAR-3 for ASME Class 1 component supports and , j 'j Table 3.9-4 of RESAR-3 for AS1E Class 2 and 3 component supports. Include information for faulta d, emergency and normal / upset opera-ting conditions, particularly for those situations involving supports s
- Active valves are those whose operability is relied upon to perform a safety function such as safe shutdown of the reactor or mitigation of the consequences
. of a postulated pipe break in the reactor coolant pressure boundary.
** Normal, Emergency and Faulted Plant Conditions relate to the loadings, and environment under which the valve is required to open or close during
' normal operation, emergency incidents and postulated faults (accidents) which affect the system in which the valve is installed.
3-22 to active pumps or valves. Indicate whether RESAR-3 applies for the design of Class 2 and 3 component supports for Vogtle since there is apparently no coverage in the PSAR. 3.44 The seismic qualification criteria and the testing performed or to be performed for Category I electrical equipment are indicated in Section 3.10 of the PSAR and the referenced Westinghouse topical report, WCAP-7817, and its associated supplements. Attachment 2, entitled " Electrical and Machanical Equipment Seismic Qualification Program," presents the basis for a program which is complete and which would be acceptable at the Operating License stage. Docu-ment your intention to develop such a program for submittal in the FSAR for the Vogtle Nuclear Plant. 4
'l
+
b I l 4 ? 1 l l l I t
,-ww-e- - , - - - , - - - , . , - _ , _
ATTACHMENT 1 PREOPERATIONAL PIPING DYNAMIC EFFECTS TEST PROGRAM Preoperational piping vibrational and dynamic effects testing should be conducted during startup functional testing on piping systems and restraints classified as ASME Class 1 and Class 2 components. The purpose of these tests is to confirm that these components have been designed to withstand the dynamic loadings from operational transient conditions that will be encountered during service as required by ASME Code Section III, par. NR-3622.3 and NC-3622.* An acceptable test program to confirm the ade-
- quacy of the designs should consist of the following:
- a. A listing of the different flow modes of operation and transients such as pump trips, valve closures, etc. to which the components
'will be subjected during the test.** For example, the transients associated with the Reactor Coolant System heatup tests should include, but not necessarily be limited to:
(1) Reactor coolant pump start (2) Reactor coolant pump trip - (3) Operation of p'ressure-relieving valves A list of selecte'd locations in the piping system that will be i - b. subjected to visual inspection and measurements (if needed) as performed by the piping designer during these tests. For each of these selected locations, the allowable deflection (peak-to-peak) criteria that will be applied to establish that the stress limits are within the design le'vels,
- c. If vibration is noted beyond t'he acceptance levels set by the criteria of b. above, corrective restraints should be designed i and installed. If during the test, the piping systems restraints i
$ are determined to be inadequate or damaged, corrective restraints should be installed and another test should be performed to determine that the vibrations have been reduced to an acceptable
-4
- i level.
/
.]
i 4
- Reference ASME Code Section III, " Nuclear Power Plant Components"
** Additional guidance for the selection of such transients is provided in the AKC Guide for Planning of Initial Startup Programs" December 7, 1970.
, . - - - - w .,o f -.,e ,e----,s.,----n--, - - - - - - - - - ---- - - - . - - - - . , - - - - - - - . - - , , . , , -- -- ,e- , -,
- . l i
i s' ATTAOIMENT 2 ELECTRICAL AND MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT SEISMIC QUALIFICATION PROGRA'i I. Seismic Test for Equipment Operability
- 1. A test program is required to confirm the functional oper-ability of all Seismic Category I electrical and mechanical equipment and instrumentation during and af ter an earthquake of magnitude up to and including the SSE.
- 2. The characteristics of the required input motion should be specified by one of the following:
(a) response spectrum (b) power spectral density function (c) time history Such characteristics,.as derived from the structures or systems seismic analysis, should be representative of the input motion at the equipment mounting locations.
'. 3. Equipment should be tested in the operational condition. Oper-ability should be verified during and af ter the testing.
, 4. The actual input motion should be characterized in the same manner as the required input motion, and the conservatism in amplituide and frequency content should be demonstrated.
- 5. Seismic excitation generally have a broad frequency content.
Random vibration input motion should be used. However, single frequency input, such as sine beats, may be applicable provided one of the following conditions are mets (a) The characteristics of the required input motion indicate that the motion is dominated by one frequency (i.e., by I
,q structural filtering effects). -
(b) The anticipated response of the equipment is adequately j represented by one mode. L (c) The input has sufficient intensity and duration to excite l all modes to the required magnitude, such that the testing response spectra vill envelope the corresponding response spectra of the individual modes. l
- 6. The input motion should be applied to one vertical and one i
principal (or two orthogonal) horizontal axes simultaneously unless it can he demonstrated that the equipment response along the vertical direction is not sensitive to the vibratory \- h b
motion along the horizontal direction, and vice versa. In the 2 case of single frequency input, the time phasing of the inputs in the vertical and horizontal directions must be such that a purely ~ rectilinear resultant input is avoided.
- 7. The fixture design should meet the following requirements:
(a) Simulate the actual service mounting (b) Cause no dynamic coupling to the test item. II. Seismic Desian Adequacy of Supports
- 1. Analyses or tests should be performed for all surr orts of
' olectrical and mechanical equipment and instrumentation to ensure their structural capability to withstand seismic excitation.
- 2. The analytical results must include the following:
(a) The required input motions to the mounted equipment should be obtained and characterized in the manner as stated in Section I.2. (b) The combined stresses of the support structures should be i within the limits of ASME Section III, Subsection NF -
" Component Support Structures" (draft version) or other comparable stress limits. ,
- 3. Supports should be tested with equipment. installed. If the equipment is inoperative during the support test, the response at the equipment mounting locations should be monitorrid and
, characterized in the manner as stated in Section I.2. In such a case, equipment should be tested separately and the actual input to the equipment should be more conservctive
. ' in amplitude and frequency content than the monitored response.
- 4. The requirements of Sections I.2,1.4, I.S. I.6 and I.7 are applicable when tests are conducted on the equipment supports.
i i j i l
. _ _ _ . _ . . , , _ , _ _ _ _ ._- _ _.._._._-._,m -. ____.,-,-. _.,,_.
'41 .
d , 4.0. REACTOR 4.1 Provide a summary of the results of the prototype, test program for the control rod drive mechanisms applicable to Vogtle Units 1, 2, 3 and 4, indicating any significant differences in design materials, , tolerances and fabrication techniques between prototype and production units and their importance in determining the need to repeat the basic tests with production units. Discuss the production unit test
- program and acceptance criteria to be applied.
4.2 Provide information on whether results of prototype and operational test programs indicate that the design bases and operational requirements of the reactivity control system components specified in Section 4.2.3.1.4 and other areas of Section 4.2.3 of RESAR-3 have been achieved. 4.3 Provide information on whether results of the prototype and operational test programs indicate that the design bases of the ft.al assembly structure and supports indicated in Section 4.2.1.1.2 of RESAR-3 have been achieved under faulted conditions. 9 ) l l l i t
,- w- , -- ,-, =-- -~m. . , - - , -- - - - - - - - - - .- -,--,-rw,, , - - - ,,, _-,.m .w-, - -, - >.w . .. - - , - - - - ,
5-1 5.0 REACTOR COOLANT SYSTEM AND CONNECTED SYSTEMS 5.1 The material in Section 5.2.1.3 of RESAR-3 on faulted design 4 analysis and procedures provides only general information with little or no detail. .Most of the information presented has been extracted from Appendix F of Section III of the ASME Code. If a particular method is desired to be used, complete detailed procedures must be provided. . For example, if you choose to do-an inelastic stress analysis, loadings should be developed using inelastic dynamic analysis methods, and details for developing . true stress-strain curves sust be submitted. The general conditions of instability and potential for unstable crack growth under faulted conditions require more detailed treatment to indicate that you have adequately considered the phenomenon. Provide the specific procedures to be applied for faulted design analysis for Vogtle Units 1, 2, 3 and 4. 5.2 Identify all Seismic Category I components whose design is based on experimental stress analyses (Appendix II of the ASME Code, Section III), and provide a susseaty of the analytical and experimental testing procedures to ba used to demonstrate compliance with the code. Submit a brief description of the mathematical or test insdels to be used and the methods of
-calculations or tests.
5.3 Section 5.2.1 of RESAR is referenced for the Design Criteria of the Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary for Vogtle. Section 5.2.1.3.3 of RESAR states that the faulted condition stress limits need not be satisfied if it can be shown from the cast of a prototype or model that the specified loads do not exceed 80% of the ultimate load or load combination used in the test.
~
If this alternative is used in the design of any component or component support, provide the specific test procedure that will be utilized during the testing. The test procedure should l demonstrate that the loads imposed on the prototype or model duplicate the effects of all design loads and/or temperatures. 5.4 Provide a brief description of the analytical methods used to determine the strese levels of ASME Class 1 ccaponents. This
- discussion should include computer programs and classical hand methods used, and any unique methods develop 2d.
- 5.5 Submit a list of computer programs that will be used in dynamic and static analyses to determine mechanical loads and deforma-tions of Seismic Category I components and equipment and the i
- - __o._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . . _ . . . _ _ _ -. _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . , _ , _ _ . _ _ _ _ , . . _ . _ _ , _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
5-2 analysis to < determine stresses in ASME Code Class 1 components.
- For each program, include a brief description of the theoretical basis, the assumptions and references used, and the extent of its application.
5.6 Describe the design control measures as required by Appendix B, 10 CFR Part 50 that will be employed to demonstrate the applic-ability and validity of the above computer programs by any of the following criteria or procedures (or other equivalent procedures) . (a) The computer program is a recognized program in the public dammin, and has had sufficient history of use to justify its applicability and validity without further demonstration. The dated program version that will be used, the sof tware or operating system, and the computer hardware configuration must be specified to be accepted by virtue of its history of use. i (b) The computer program's solutions to a series of test problems with accepted results, have been demonstrated. to be substan-tially identical to those obtained by a similar, independently written program in the public domain. The test problems should be demonstrated to be similar to or with the range of applicability for the probisms analyzed by the computer program to justify acceptance of the program. (c) The program's solutions to a series of test problems are substantially identical to those obtained by hand calcula-tions or from accepted experimental test or analytical results published in technical literature. The test problems should be demonstrated to be similar to the problems analyzed' to justify acceptance of the program. 5.7 Provide a summary comparison of the results obtained from each computer program with either the results derived from a similar program in the public domain, on a previously approved computer program or results from the test problems. Include typical static and/or dynamic response loading, stress, etc. comparisons, prefer-ably in graphical form. 5.8 In addition to the specifications already listed in the PSAR for principal pressure retaining ferritic materials and austenitic stain-less steels intended to be used for components that are part of the reactor coolant pressure boundary (RCPB), provide RCFB specifications nre ,- ,. - -
, _%, -. __, w - r - . . - - - - - . . , . - - , . ,.-w . _ - . - ,m....
jfa 5-3 f for the weld materials for fabrication and assembly of the components. i With respect to ferritic materials (including welds) of the reactor pressure vessel beltline, provide information regarding the specifica-
. tions for these materials showing additionally imposed limits on residual elements (reportable and nonceportable) by specification requirements which are intended to reduce sensitivity to irradiation embrittlement .in service. Any additional-or special requirements should also be indicated.
5.9 Provide a description of the compatibility of the reactor coolant pressure boundary materials of construction with insulating materials and with the environmental atmosphere in the event of coolant leakage. 5.10 To allow evaluation of the adequacy of the proposed heatup and cooldown limits for this plant, as dictated by fracture toughness of the ferritic materials, provide the following information: 5.10.1 Identify criteria by which the initial upper shelf fracture energy levels for the materials of the reactor vessel beltline (including welds), as determined by Charpy V-notch tests on specimens oriented in the " weak" direction of the material, will be established. i' 5.10.2 It is not clear which revision of ASTM E-185 will be used, because
- 5.4.3.1 references ASTM E-185, whereas B.1.27 references ASTM E-185-70.
State if the program will conform with ASTM E-185-73. 5.11' For all austenitic stainless steel used for components that are part of: (1) the reactor coolant pressure boundary, (2) systems required for reactor shutdown, (3) systems required for emergency core cooling, (4) reactor vessel internals required for emergency core cooling, and (5) reactor vessel internals relied on to permit adequate core cooling . for any mode of normal operation or under postulated accident conditions, provide the following information (Reference Regulatory Guide 1.44): 5.11.1 Describe the procedures that will be used to ensure that the material is suitably cleaned and protected against con *:aminants capable of
,,,,,..,n.. , ,. ----,---,v - . , -..,-e ,, , --..,,----n-- - - p..-,,....,,- ,. ,w , t --,,,r_, _ ..- - - ---r. e
- y. ., . . .
5-4 causing stress corrosion cracking throughout the fabrication, shipment, storage, construction, testing, and operation of components.and systems. 5.11.2 Provide a description of materials, processes, inspections, and tests that will be used to ensure freedom from the increased susceptibility to intergranular stress corrosion caused by sensitization. This should include the following:
- a. If special processing or fabrication methods are used that subject the material to temperatures between 800*F and 1500*F, or that involve slow cooling from temperatures over 1500*F, provide justification that such treatments will not cause increased susceptibility to intergranular stress corrosion.
- b. Indicate special requirements on chemical analysis for any meterials that, during normal operation, will be exposed to water environments containing over 0.10 ppa dissolved oxygen when at temperatures over 200*F.
- c. If the presence of delta ferrite is relied on to prevent sensitiza-tion of welds or castings, describe the methods that will be used
. to ensure the presence of at least 5% delta ferrite.
5.11.3 Describe the procedures and requirements that will be employed to avoid hot cracking of austenitic stainless steel welds, especially addressing filler matal compositions, welding procedure qualifica-tions, and methods for ensuring adequate delta ferrite content of production welds. i 5.12 The inservice inspection program, described in the Technical Specifica-tions and PSAR, should incorporate the provisions of the 1972 Winter Addenda for Hydrotest and Class 2 system preservice and inservice inspection, except that the pressure and temperature in paragraph ISC-261(a) of the Winter Addenda should be changed to 275 psig and 200*F. This change will make Section II requirements conform to the proposed Regulatory Guide, " Inservice Inspection of ASME, Class 2 and 3 Nuclear Power Plant Components." Consideration should also be. given to future Class 3 system examinations as well as preservice
~
and operational pump and valve tests. m 9
4
~
12-1 . 12.0 RADIATION PROTECTION 12.1 Describ's the operating ptocedures that will assure that personnel exposures will be kept as low as practicable during plant operation and maintenance. Include a description j of (1) administrative methods such as prejob planning and preparation, use of exposure allocations, use of radiation work permits, area access control methods, specific job training, and job debriefings, and (2) methods of reducing radiation levels such as removal of unnecessary sources of radiation, installation of temporary shielding, and decontamination. The criteria used for implementing various exposure ' reduction methoda should also be presented. 12.2 Identify the maximum and average airborne radioactivity levels for normal operation, including anticipated operational occurrences, that will be allowed in areas within plant structures and within the restricted area where-plant personnel, construction workers, or site visitors are permitted. l 12.3 Describe the process equipment sources which contribute significantly to plant radiation levels and which constitute the basis for shielding design. In general, any piece of equipment in which radioactive materials may be filtered, domineralized, concentrated, or stored should be listed. For each component listed, describe (1) the approximate physical size and shape, (2) the total curie quantity of each of the principal nuclides expected in the component for both normal operation and expected operational occurrences, and (3) the expected radiation levels at the surface. The
. information presented should be in tabular form and the listing should be grouped by system function as much as possible.
12.4 Describe design criteria for the erection and dimensions of shield walls, for penetrations through shield walls, and for acceptable radiation levels in the control room, at valve stations, sample stations, and other areas likely to be occupied during normal operational and maintenance activities. Provide justification of the thickness of shielding to be provided, l including the geometric and physical models, and assumptions and data used. k
, . I 17-1 l 17.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE 17.1 The Georgia Power Company (GPC) Quality Assurance (QA) Program for the l design and construction of the Vogtle Nuclear Plant (VNP) is not ade-quately described in the PSAR. Provide more detailed descriptions and clarifications as follows: 17.1.1 Section 17.1 is unclear because the individual activities of GPC, Southern Services, Inc. (SSI), and the Bechtel Corporation (BC) cannot be identified and evaluated. Clearly describe GPC's QA activities in Section 17.1 including all assigned responsibilities and authorities for the major organizations, contractors, and vendors. 17.1.2 Clearly define the QA interfaces and attendant responsibilities within GPC for onsite and offsite organizations. Also, describe the QA interface between GPC and SSI and BC. 17.1.3 Provide organizational charts which clearly show those GPC individuals and groups responsible for implementing the 18 criteria of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B, for the design and construction of VNP. 17.1.4 Identify those individuals or groups responsible for establishing and implementing OA related policies, procedures, and instructions. 17.1.5 Identify who reviews and approves the QA Program and Manuals for GPC and for the major contractors. 17.1.6 Identify and descries the authority and independence of those indi-viduals or groups who perform the QA functions of inspection and auditing. 17.1.7 Describe the qualification requirements for the positions responsible for managing and directing the QA Program. 17.1.8 List. and describe the duties of the Quality Assurance Committee, Quality Assurance Engineer (QAE) and QA Field Representatives (QAFR). 17.1.9 Identify and provide a brief description of the purpose and scope of the QA Program procedures which pertain to the design, construction, and pre-operational testing of the VNP and which demonstrate compli-ance with all applicable criteria of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendt: S. 17.1.10 Provide a listing or cross index table which shows each QA Program procedure and the related criterion of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B, which is addres. sed.
.-g., , _ , , _ . _ _ , _ _ _ _ .- , . , , - . , - --
17-2
. _17.1.11 Describe the formal indoctrination and/or training program that has been or will be established for all those personnel performing QA related activities.
17.1.12 Describe the controls which assure that QA policies, manuals, proce-dures, and instructions, including changes thereto are received and implemented by responsible individuals or groups. 17.1.13 Identify and describe those audits which evaluate the QA program policies, activities, and procedures. Include the frequency, identify the audit personnel, and list distribution of. reports. 17.1.14 Describe those audits performed by GPC personnel which provide a com-prehensive verification and evaluation of all phases of the QA Program activities, to assure that the QA Program for GPC is effective and meaningful. State the distribution of reports, frequency, and identify audit personnel. 17.2 The QA Program which covers all of the responsibilities delegated to Southern Services, Inc. for design, procurement, inspection, contractor, and vendor activities pertaining to the VNP has not been described in the PSAR. We require the following additional information relevant to SSI's QA activities. 17.2.1 Identify those major contractors, vendors, consultants, and third - parties for which SSI has the-responsibility, relative to the design, construction, and preoperational testing of the VNP. . 17.2.2 Identify and describe the organizational interfaces between SSI and the parties identified in 17.2.1 above. 17.2.3 Provide complete organizational charts which show the SSI organiza-tions, contractors, vendors, third party inspectors and consultants responsible for establishing and implementing quality related activi-ties. All interfaces must be clearly shown. 17.2.4 Provide clear identification and descriptions of duties showing ade-quate authority and independency of those individuals and/or groups responsible for formulating, establishing, and implementing QA related policies, procedures, and instructions within the areas of responsi-bility of SSI. 17.2.5 Describe the organizational authority and independence of those individuals or groups responsible for the QA functions af inspection and audit.
-,--r -- m---- s- ,,----me-m----.-- ----~,------o,n+- - - - - = . - - , - +-w
17-3 l l 17.2.6 Describe the qualification requirements for the position of QA Manager and list his specific responsibilities. 17.2.7 Identify the responsible individuals who originate, review, and approve SSI's QA Manual, procedures, and instructions. Identify the SSI management final approval level for the QA Manual. 17.2.8 Briefly describe the major aspects of SSI's QA program procedures relative to VNP which demonstrate comoliance to apolicable criteria of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B. 17.2.9 Provide a listing or cross index table which relates each SSI QA pro-gram procedure to the applicable criteria of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B. 17.2.10 Describe the control systems or activities which assure that SSI's QA program policies, procedures and manuals, including changes or revisions thereto, are distributed to all responsible parties and properly implemented. 17.2.11 Describe SSI's training program for those personnel who perform QA activities that will assure proper implementation of QA procedures and requirements. If a training or indoctrination program does not exist at the present time, state implementation date. 17.2.12 Provide an indepth discussion of those audits performe'd by SSI manage-ment which provide independent verification and evaluation of the effectiveness of the QA program and procedures relative to compliance with SSI policies and with 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B. State the frequency of audits, state the distribution of audit reports and identify audit personnel. 17.2.13 Describe those audits performed by SSI personnel or S3I's representa-tives which provide for verification and evaluation of SSI's QA pro-gram, procedures and activities to assure that they are effective and in compliance. Provide audit schedules, identify audit personnel and list audit report distribution. 17.3 The Bechtel Corporation QA Program description is unclear in the areas of organizational responsibility and auth'rity, o QA activities, vendor activities, and field activities at VNP. We require the following l clarification to complete our evaluation. 17.3.1 Provide an organizational chart which clearly shows the organizational structure, line authority, and responsibility for each BC organization performing QA related activities on the VNP project.
l 17-4 17.3.2 Identify and describe the responsibilities, authority, and independence of- those individuals or groups responsible for establishing and imple-menting QA policies and procedures relative to those activities associ-ated with the VNP program. Specifically, describe and clarify the dual responsibilities of the position of Manager, Start-up and Quality Assurance. The duties of Start-up and Quality Assurance appear to be in conflict. 17.3.3 Describe the authority and independence of those individuals or groups responsible for QA activities in the areas of design review, procure-ment review, inspection, audit activities. 17.3.4 Describe the qualification requirements for those positions that manage and supervise the QA Program activities. I 17.3.5 Identify the responsible individuals who originate, review, and approve BC's QA Mknual.. procedures , and instructions. Identify the final review and approval authority level in BC's management for the QA Manual. 17.3.6 Provide a brief description of the important aspects of BC's QA pro-cedures which demonstrate compliance to the applicable criteria of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B.
, 17.3.7 Provide a cross index table or listing of BC's QA procedures, showing those criteria of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B, which the individual procedures address.
17.3.8 Describe the controls which assure that BC's QA program policies,
- activities, procedures, manuals, and changes thereto are distributed to _ responsible personnel and properly implemented.
17.3.9 Describe BC's formal indoctrination and training program for those personnel performing quality related activities to assure proficiency , in implementing the QA procedures in review, inspection and audit l activities. I
. 17.3.10 Describe design reviews and design change reviews and state the distri-bution of the related reports, j
. 17.3.11 Provide a more indepth description of the calibration and maintenance activities for measuring and testing equipment. Indicate the criteria for calibration, the frequency, and the procedure.
9
,, --- - , . . ..-,e- - - -
o . 17-5 17.3.12 Describe in more detail the process for control of nonconforming mate-rial, parts, or components.
~17.3.13 Describe those audits performed by corporate or top level management which provide independent verification and evaluation of the QA pro-gran policies, procedures, and activities to assure they are meaningful and effective and are complying with corporate policy and 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B. Include the audit report distribution, identify audit personnel, and state audit frequency.
17.3.14 Identify and describe those audits performed by BC personnel in the areas of design, procurement, vendor control, and inspection that
- provide a comprehensive verification and evaluation of the QA program procedures and activities to assure a meaningful and effective program.
State the audit schedules, identify the audit personnel, and list distri-
- bution of audit reports.
3
]
1 . l l I i And
? ~
)
n , G)rMMe UNITED STATES g /g '7, y l ' 1 ' N ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION WASHINGTON. D.C. 20545 May 16, 19 73 Docket Nos. 50-424 50-425 50-426 50-427 7
)
Gieorgia Power Company ATTN: I. S. Mitchell, III Vice President and Secretary P. O. Box 4545 Atlanta, Georgia 30302 Gentlemen: In order that we may continue our review of your application for a license to construct the Alvin W. Vogtle Nuclear Plant, Units 1, 2, 3, and 4, additional infomation is required. The specific infomation required is listed in +.he enclosure. It is grouped by sections that correspond to the ral . ..t sections of the Preliminary Safety Analysis Report. Our tentative review schedule is based on the assumption that this additional information will be available for cur review by July 6, 1973. If you cannot meet this date, please inform us within 7 days after receipt of this letter
- so that we may revise our scheduling.
. Please contact us if you desire any discussion or clarifi-cation of the material requested.
Sincerely, ,
.. / -/
Karl Kniel, Chief Pressurized Water Reactors Branch No. 2 Directorate of Licensing
Enclosure:
Request for Additional Information ecs : Listed on page 2 550.) 2 % Oi5 7 -
i ,
-e Georgia Power Conipany .
ccs: Southern Services, Inc. ATTN: Mr. Ruble A. Thomas Vice President P. O. Box 2625 Bimingham, Alabama 35202 Mr. George F. Trowbridge, Esquire Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge 91017th Street, NW Washington, D. C. 2006 s t e D
. r .
2-1 REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
-1 CEORCIA POWER COMPANY ALVIN W. V0GTLE NUCLEAR PLANT UNITS 1. 2. 3 AND 4
. DOCIET NOS. 50-424. 50-425. 50-426 AND 50-427 i
. 2.0 SITE CHARACTERISTICS 2.1 Provide the bases for the standard project flood (SPF) estimate at J .the VNP intake structure, and for the corresponding wind-wave runup analyses. Provide fetch diagram (s) used to estimate wave activity associated with the postulated das failure surge flooding, the SPF, and the probabh .marf aum flood (PMF developed from the Clark Hill ,
Dan spillway design flood). In addition, your reference, " Clark Hill
; Project, DPR, Vol. II, Appendix I - Hydrology" dated December 1,1945, is not, because of its age, readily available to the public. There-
[
- fore, provide extracts of the report as necessary to document'the i
procedures used in accordance with the general outline of section 2.4.3 of the AEC's SAR Standard Format.
~!
2.2 The following are required to support your conclusions on the effects of upAtream dam failures: 2.2.1. Discuss and document the effects on the peak water surface elevation at the VNP of other possible modes of dam failure. Include the effects of larger embankment failure and shorter failure times. 1
- - - . ,. . . . . _ . . , , , . , , ,. .-....m, _ _ _ . . , . - - _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . __,. _. ____- . , , _ - _ _
=
2-2 2.2.2 If a single seismic event can be postulated which can adversely effect more than one upstream dam, provide an analysis of the effects at VNP of such critical simultaneous failures.
; 2.2.3 Provide your estimates of the peak discharges and stages in the Savannah River at VNP for all modes of failure you have assumed.
2.3 Discuss and document the potential effects of icing on the exposed
'{ portions of safety-related water supply facilities. Include the
'! effects on walls, well pumps, the river intake and service water cooling towers. If icing is a factor, discuss the remedial action
' to be taken to preclude adverse affects on safety-related equipment.
J 2.4 Provide the range of plant water use requirements (both consumptive and non-consumptive) for both normal and emergency shutdown for each j source of water. In addition, provide the range of normal water
> supply requirements for each proposed well.
2.5 What necessary authorization, issued by an appropriate regulatory
?,
agency (State, River Basin Commission, etc.), to withdraw or discharge
.i surface water and groundwater for consumptive and non-consumptive l plant use will be required? ,Based upon infor1 nation presently avail-able, discuss the safety implications of any restrictions that could be placed on water use.
i .
-w - - - - . - ..----n, ,.-.,,,,,,e-, ----- ,- , - - - ,,- -.---n-, -n.. --- - - - - -r,- 7
~.; .
~
2-3 2.6 What operational criteria will be used to assure that the proposed standby nuclear service wells will be available for use (include a discussion of the procedures to be used following a major plant related event such as an accident or earthquake)'?
, 2.7 Provide a tabulation of the design criteria for the standby nuclear service well surface structure, pump, screen, discharge structures, and other facilities. Similarly, provide the design criteria for j the three normal aske-up wells. Include the anticipated depths from i
- which water is to be extracted. Will normal plant requirements for potable and other purposes be drawn from the nuclear standby wells
;; in the event of severe earthquakes? Discuss the provisions to pre-
! vent back drainage in all wells.
2.8 Identify the location and depth of all observation points used during A
- l and since the pumping test referred to in section 3K.5 and figure 3K-5.
j ' Cross reference this data with the information presented in section 2.4.
. On figure 3K-1 or 3K-5 show, to scale, the location of all proposed 4
onsite wells and the observation points used during and since the 1 pumping tests. Extend Table 2.4.2 to include the latest available i data and levels. Provide a separate column which summarizes the i range of water levels you have noted for each hole, exclusive of the pumping tests. Provide documentation of the well pumping tests in sufficient detail to allow independent review of your estimates of well performance.
2-4 2.9 What evidence is there to assure that there is no hydraulic connec-tion between aquifers? What tests will be made during and after construction to test for such a connection? Include a discussion of the construction dewatering requirements anticipated, and the extent
, of horizontal and vertical dewatering hydraulic influence.
2.10 Provide the locations and approximate elevations and flow rates of f springs within about three miles of the site (west of the river). I y 2.11 What provisions will be made to assure that future groundwater mining
; by others will not affect plant requirements?
.i 2.12 Describe dispersion, dilution, and flow characteristics of the perched I
and artesian aquifers to be expected during normal and/or inadvertent releases of radioactivity. 1 l 2.13 The occurrence of severe seismic events has been known to cause both short-term and long-term changes in well water levels. What allow-i ances will be provided for in the design of both the normal make-up i and nuclear service water wells to prevent short-term hydrodynamic ! t J forces from causing well failures. Include the design bases for well , screens. 2.14 Provide further evidence that the onsite meteorological measurements program described in Section 2.3.3 of the PSAR conforms to the 1 l recommendations of Regulatory Guide 1.23, especially with regard to ! l
. I l
l
.3 .
2-5
. instrument accuracy in the measurement of the temperature difference between levels at which the temperatures are measured.
2.15 An inspection of the joint frequency distribution tables of wind speed and direction by delta-T stability class (Table 2.3-7 of the PSAR), based on data collected at the Savannah River Laboratory tower, shows an unreasonably high frequency (56%) of extremely unstable cases. A visual inspection of the temperature instrument installed at the 10-foot level on the tower indicates that the temperature measurements made at this location do not accurately reflect ambient tengeratures in the free atmosphere. Additionally, the rate of recovery for this data was approximately 60 percer t, which is not acceptable. Provide a set of joint frequency distributions of wind
, speed and direction by delta-T stability class for at least a one i full year period of record from the Savannah River Laboratory tower
} using the temperature measurements at the 120- and 300-foot levels.
The temperature differences should be adjusted to represent condi-tions between the 33- and 150-ft levels. Specify the delta-T and wind speed classes as illustrated in Tables 1 and 2 of Regulatorv Guide 1.23. 1 2.16 When the annual onsite data accumulation is completed, provide joint frequency distributions of wind speed and direction by delta-T stability class for the full year of data. The joint frequency
I ,t . 2-6 . distributions should be based on winds measured at the 35-foot level, and lapse rates should be based on measurements.nade between the 33-and 150-foot levels. Specify the percent of data recovery for the period of record. 14 tere periods of missing data are of days duration (as opposed to sporadic duration of a few hours at a time), specify i the periods of missing data. Present any evidence as to the degree of representativeness of the period of data collection. The tables should be presented in the format suggested in Regulatory Guide 1.23. 2.17 Provide short-term (accident) and long-term (routine) diffusion esti-mates based on the revised joint frequency data from the Savennah River Laboratory tower. As soon as possible after the annual onsite
; data collection is completed, provide short-term (accident) and long-ters (routine) estimates based on the full year of onsite meteorologi-i cal data.
.i
', 2.18 Provide the rationale for assuming an average wind velocity of 300 mph I~
instead of a maximum wind velocity of 360 mph in determining the
- dynamic wind pressure as described in Section 3.3.2.1.1 on page 3.3-3 1
of the PSAR. 2.19 What is the geologic significance of the clastic dikes mentioned on l l page 2.5-67
l
.s .
2-7 2.20 on pages 2.5-2,3 the basement complex is described as also including Triassic sediments. What is the configuration and location, with respect to the site of the Triassic basin? What is the evidence that the basin is not bounded by faults, in a manner similar to other fault-bounded Triassic basins in the Piedmont. 2.21 The cross section (B-B') illustrated in figure 2.5-6 shows a monoclinal flexure (albeit with vertical exaggeration). Discuss the structural I relationship of this flexure and any bounding fault of the Triassic basin. l 2.22 Discuss the possible relationship between the apparently anamalous high seismic response in the zone enclosed by the 8-1/2 value shown on figure 2.5-26 to basin bounding structures in the basement complex. o e l
)
i I l 1
)
' l 1
. I .
S 3-1 3.0 DESIGN OF STRUCTURES COMPONENTS. EQUIPMENT AND SYSTEMS l l 3.1 In order to use the design spectra obtained by modifying Newmark's curves as described in 3.7.1.1, a set of lower damping values should be employed instead of those listed in Table 3.7-1. The following is an acceptable set of damping values when the modified Newmark's design spectra are used: (Para. 3.7.1) At or Less Than i Structure or System / Stress Level 1/2 Yield At Yield
. Small piping Q12" dia) -
.5 1 Large Piping .5 1
- Welded Steel 2 5 3
Bolted or Riveted Steel 5 7 Prestressed Concrete 2 5 j Reinforced Concrete 2 5 1 3.2 When the response spectra method is used for dynamic analysis of l structures, piping systems and components, responses due to two hori-
.. . zontal and one vertical input motions should be combined by the square j
root of the sum of the squares. (Para. 3. 7.2.7 and 3.7.3. 7) l $ , 3.3 The simplified lumped mass and soil spring approach proposed in the , I PSAR to characterize soil-structure interaction is not appropriate. j
- )
~ The use of equivalent soil springs may produce a pronounced filtering of the ground motion response amplitude and response frequencies due I to inadequate representation of soil parameters. Indicate your intent to adopt one of the following methods for soil-structure interaction l analysis. 1 i i mv - r . ,-+--e --yes. -,-,m.-------ee---- e.----r=*- P----4.-
3-2 (a) A nonlinear finite element approach with appropriate nonlinear stress-strain and damping relationship for the soil.
.(b) An iterative linear finite element approach with appropriate nonlinear stress-strain and damping relationship for the soil (pseudo-nonlinear approach).
(c) Lumped springs to represent the soil with appropriate dampings
; (not more than 10% of critical damping corresponding to horizontal and vertical springs), utilizing a variation in the soil proper-ties corresponding to the span of maximum and minimum strain levels so that the floor response spectra obtained envelop those using the finite element approach. If a pseudo-nonlinear finite element approach is used, identify the manner in which variation in the properties of the soil are accounted for. (Para. 3.7.2.1) i 3.4
- Specify the number of significant cycles of stress reversal expected during the lifetime of the plant. Describe how this number is arrived at by providing information on the estimated number of seismic events, and the magnitude duration and number of stress cycles for each event. (Para. 3.7.3.1) 3.5 Use of static loads equivalent to the peak of the floor spectrum curves is not adequate for the seismic design of components and equipment. Either use static loads equal to 1.5 times the peak of
3-3 the floor spectrum curve or demonstrate that the contribution of all modes has been incorporated in the seismic analysis. (Para. 3. 7.3.5)
- 3. In addition to the seismic instrumentation described in the PSAR, several multielement seismoscopes are required at selected locations of Category I structures, systems and components. The multielement seismoscopes provide response spectra data for peak acceleration vs
', frequencies. Locations of installations should be determined from a j dynamic analysis such that the maximum motion can be recorded and that the most pertinent data can be obtained. (Para. 3.7.4.2)
I
- 3.7 Commit to a plan for the utilization of the seismic data that would t.
be acquired from installed instrumentation in the event of an earth-quake. By comparing measured responses with the computed results of the system dynamic analysis, it is possible to verify seismic analysis
. ',1
. assumptions, damping characteristics and the analytical model used
.. j for the plant. (Para. 3.7.4.4) 4 3.8 List the structures which will be analyzed using plastic analysis {. and specify the method of analysis planned. (See Para. 3.8.1.2.3) 3.9 Provide sketches of Category I Water Tanks. (Para. 3.8.1.7) 3.10 The load combination equations shown in the PSAR for Category I structures other than containment are not in accordance with the current regulatory staf f position. The acceptable load combination equations are as follows:
3-4 3.10.1 Concrete Service Load Conditf;n_s A. If working stress design is used,( }
- 1) .S = D + L
- 2) S=D+L+E y
- 3) S=D+L+W B. If Strength Design metho'd is used,
- 1) U = 1.4D + 1.7L + 1.3 T, + 1.3 H,
- 2) U = 1.4D + 1.7L + 1.7W + 1.3 T, + 1.3 H,
- 3) U = 1.4D + 1.7L + 1.9E + 1'.3 T, + 1.3 H Factored Desian Conditions:
- 4) U = D + L + H , + T, + E'
'5) U = D + L + T, + H, + We
- 6) U.=D+L+TA+HA + 1.5 PA
- 7) U=D+L+TA+HA+
- A+ .0Wr + j + Ya # 1*
f
- 8) U=D+L+TA+ A+ .0 PA+ "r + j+ m) + 1.0 E'
- NOTES:
- 1) If thermal stresses due to T, and H , are present and are self-limiting and secondary in nature, a 33% increase in allowable stresses is permitted (working stress only).
I
8 1 1 I 3-5
- 2) In combinations (6), (7) and (8), the peak values of PA , TA'
, H'Y'Y'Y A j r a shall be used unless a time-history analysis is performed to justify otherwise. For combination (8), the capacity reduction factor 9 can be 1.0.
~
- 3) If prestressing forces F, are present, they should be included in the dead loads, D.
- 4) For combinations (7) and (8), local stresses due to the con-
^!
centrated load Y ,may exceed the allowables provided there will be no loss of function. i 3.10.2 Structural Steel A. If elastic working stress design methods are used,( }
, 1) S=D+L
.j 2) S=D+L+E
- 3) S=D+L+W 4
B. If plastic design methods are used,
- 1) Y = 1.7D + 1.7L + 1.3T,+ 1.3H,
- 2) Y = 1.7D + 1.7L + 1.3To + 1.3Ho + 1.7E l
- 3) Y = 1.7D + 1.7L + 1.3T 9+ 1.3H, + 1.7W
3-6 Factored Load Conditions A. - If elastic working stress methods are used,
- 4) 1.6 S = D + L + T, + H,.+ E'
- 5) 1.6 S = D + L + T, + H, + W t
- 6) 1.6S=D+L+TA+HA+PA
- 7) 1.8S=D+L+Tg+HA+ A+ .0 Gr + j+Y}* a
- 8) 2.0S=D+L+TA+HA+PA + 1.0 (Y, + Y) + Y,) + E '
'i
; B. If plastic design methods are used,
- 4) 0.9 Y = D + L + T, + H, + E'
! 5) 0.9 Y = D + L + T , + H, + Wt
- 6) 0.9Y=D+L+TA+HA + 1.5PA
- 7) 0.9Y=D+L+TA+HA+
- A+ *
(r+Yj+ m} + *$
- 8) 0.9Y=D+L+T +HA+ .0Pg + 1. 0 (Y r + j + I m) + 1.0E' l
- NOTES:
l
. 1) If thermal stresses due to T , and H, are present and are self-j limiting in nature, a 50% increase in allowable stresses is permitted (working stress only).
- 2) In conbinations (6), (7), and (8) the peak values of PA , TA'.
H' shall be used unless a time-history analysis A r' j* m is performed to justify otherwise.
3-7
- 3) For combinations (7) and (8) local stresses due to the con-centrated load Y ,may exceed the allowables, provided there will be no loss in function.
3.10.3 Loads. Definition of Terms and Nomenclature NORMAL LOADS Normal loads are those loads to be encountered, as specified, during
' initial construction stages, during test conditions and later during normal plant operation and shutdown. They include the following:
D - Dead loads and their related moments and forces, including any i permanent loads except prestressing forces. L - Live loads and their related moments and forces, including any i movable equipment loads and other loads which vary with intensity t J I and occurrence, like soil and hydrostatic pressures, and pressure
! differences due to variation in heating and cooling and'outside atmospheric changes.
T, - Thermal effects and loads during normal operating or shutdown conditions, based on the most critical transient or steady state condition. H, - Pipe reactions during normal operating or shutdown conditions, based on the most critical transient or steady state condition.
- 2 .
3-8 SEVERE ENVIR0tttENTAL LOADS Severe environmental loads are those loads to be infrequently encoun-tered during the plant life. Included in this category are: E - Loads generated by the Operating Basis Earthquake or,' if an OBE t is not specified, loads generated by half the Safe Shutdown Earth-quake. If both are specified, E shall be the larger of the two, and t i
, W - Loads generated by the design wind specified for the plant.
EXTREME ENVIRONMENTAL LOADS j
; Extreme environmental loads are those loads which are credible but are highly improbable. They include:
.i E' - Loads generated by the Safe Shutdown Earthquake, and t
W' - Loads generated by the design tornado specified for the plant. They include loads due to the tornado wind pressure, due to i tornado-created differential pressures, and due to tornado-generated missiles. I ABNORMAL LOADS , 1
)
Abnormal loads are those loads generated by a postulated accident ; within a building and/or compartment thereof. Postulated accidents i I 1
3-9 primarily include high energy pipe ruptures. Included in this category are the following: P - Pressure equivalent static load within or across a compartment A and/or building, generated by the postulated accident, and including an appropriate Dynsmic Load Factor applied to the peak of the pressure-time curve. (See Note 1) T - Thermal effects and loads generated by the postulated accident,
] A i
; H - Pipe reactions under thermal conditions ganerated by the postu-A lated accident.
t i Y - Reaction equivalent static load on the rupture high energy pipe
. r during the postulated accident, and including an appropriate Dynsmic Load Factor applied to the peak of the reaction-time cu rve. (See Note 1)
- Y - Jet impingement equivalent static load on a structure generated h by a ruptured high energy pipe during the postulated accident, and including an appropriate Dynsmic Load Factor applied to the peak of the jet-time load. (See Note 1)
Y, - Missile impact equivalent static load on a structure generated by or during the postulated accident, and including an appropriate Dynamic Load Factor applied to the peak of the missile impact-time curve. (See Note 1) l l l
3-10 NOTE 1: In determining an appropriate Dynamic Load Factor for P 'A Y,, Y and Y ,, elasto-plastic behavior may be assumed and an appropriate ductility ratio may be used in accordance with the following recommended values for various structural elements:
- 1. Tension reinforced concrete beams
.; and slabs (flexure controlling) . . . u = .05 ,,
i l 2, Doubly reinforced concrete beses A' s j and slabs (flexure controlling) . . . u = p.05p,; p, , g t 4
- 3. Concrete beses and slabs in region requiring shear reinf. . . . . u = 1.3
. 4. Concrete columns ..........u=1.0 e
7, 5. Steel tension ===hers . .......u=.5[,where Y
, e: ultimate strain u
s e: yield strain
, y
- 6. Steel compression members . . . . . . u = 1.0 e
- 7. Steel flexural members .......u=.2[y i
i
\
-._.__..* . _ , . _ _ _ , _ , _ _ _ _ . _ _ , .._,_-._,._,,,,_,.,,_.__..._____._,_____.___I
3-11 When utilizing the above-listed ductility ratios, the deter-mined Dynamic Load Factor shall not be less than 1.0. Further-more, should any of the loads AP ' Yj ' Yrand Y, occur simul-taneously on a structure, the combined loads should not result in strains higher than those defined by the ductility ratios.
- ^
OTHER DEFINITIONS 1
?
j S - For concrete structures, S is the required section strength based I on working stress design methods and the allowable stresses defined in Section 8.10 of ACI 316-71. ' i i For structural steel, S is the required section strength based on elastic design methods and the allowable stresses defined in l
- Part I of the AISC " Specification for the Design, Fabrication and Erection of Structural Steel for Buildings," February 12, 1969.
I. NOTE: The 33% increase in allowable stresses for seismic or wind 1
- loadings is not permitted.
", U - For concrete structures, U is the required section strength based
' on ultimate strength design methods and the allowable stresses as described in ACI 318-71.
Y - For structural steel, Y is the required section strength based on plastic design methods and the allowable stresses of Part II of i. i l
3-12 , i the AISC " Specification for the Design, Fabrication and Erection of Structural Steel for Buildings," February 12, 1969. 3.11 Demonstrate that the design pressure of the enclosure building blow-out panels is sufficiently low so that the structural integrity will not be impaired by the pressure generated by high energy line break. 3.12 Justify the design of encloaure building for the loads resulting from normal operating conditions only.
, 3.13 Justify the reference to the ACI 318-63 Building Code and ACI 613-54 l Standard in Section 3.8.2. Both of these documents have been superseded.
3.14 The load combination equations for containment included in the PSAR are not in accordance with the current regulatory staff position. The acceptable load combination equations and allowable stresses are
$ those in the CC-3000 of ACI-ASME (ACI 359) Code with the following exceptions:
4 The following modifications on Subsection CC-3000 are required: On Table CC-3200-1
- Y , jet impingement loads, and Y ,, missile impact loads should be added to'the loads listed in this table.
- Each combination that includes 1.0 Yr sh uld also include 1.0 Y and 1.0 Y,.
- - . _ . _ _ . , _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . . _.,_,-m__ _ _ _ ...., _. , -_
3-13
- For definition of loads see request 3.10.3 pertaining to structures other than containment.
On CC-3421.1
- The footnote on page 196 should be revised to indicate that the 33-1/3% increase in allowable' stresses is permitted only for tem-perature loads and not for wind or earthquake loads.
On CC-3422.2
- The footnote on page 197 should be deleted.
., 3.15 Describe the way in which the shear stresses resulting from a pipe break reaction on the reactor support structure will be carried by the cracked concrete.
3.16 Indicate the deviations in allowable stresses for the design loading conditions in the working stress method referred to in Para. 3.8.2.6. 3.17 State the magnitudes of the earthquake generated soil pressure (in terms of active and passive pressures) on exterior walls of contain-ment and indicate the method by which these pressures will be used to design the structure components. 3.18 Describe the waterproofing membranes and water stops applied to the portion of the containment structure located below the groundwater
,, ,- , - - - - -w---m---- -,- - ,- - - . - - - , - - - - ---- - - -- . - - --- - , - -e. .-- - -- ,,, ,- - -- - - , ,
1 3-14 level. Indicate the measures to be taken to check watertightness of the containment structure during the service life of the' plant. (Para. 3.8.2.7.8) 3.19 Describe the provisions taken to transfer seismic and wind shear
> forces across construction joints and the wat'erproofing membranes installed between containment foundation and subgrade located under
- it.
,I 3.20 Discuss the protective measures to be taken to tie down all slabs, ,
blocks and partitions which are potential missiles. t
- 3.21 Describe the provisions to be taken to prevent corrosion of the liner plate in case of a buckling toward the inside of the containment and the surveillance measures to be used to detect such condition. ~
i (Para. 3.8.2.6.5) i I 3.22 Indicate the relative strengths of the liner plate'against buckling as compared with its anchors and anchor welds. Describe.the method
, . of computing the stresses in the anchor and concrete resulting from 3
a buckled panel of the liner. (Para. 3.8.2.6.2.6) 3.23 Discuss the method that will be used to investigate effects of a failure of one liner anchor on the adjacent anchors and indicate the provisions taken to prevent the " zipper effect" from propagating.
3-15 Consider horizontal and vertical forces acting simultaneously.
.(Para. 3.8.2.6.2.6) 3.24 Describe the criteria used to design concrete sections subject to cracking to resist loads producing torsion alone and torsion combined with direct shear.
. 3.25- Describe, with the aid of a sketch, the support of a polar crane, its
[ connection to the concrete walls and provisions to resist the shears i induced by earthquake. i
-l .3.26 Specify the allowable value of. tangential shear that can be resisted i by concrete alone in a prestressed concrete structure and indicate 1
the reinforcement that will be provided to carry the shear in excess i of the allowable. Lb i Submit a list of computer programs that will be used in structural q 3.27 and seismic analyses to determine stresses and deformations of Seismic category I structures. Include a brief description of each
. program and the extent of its application.
6 3.28 Describe the design control measures as required by 10 CFR Part 50 Appendix B that will be employed to demonstrace the applicability and validity of the above computer programs by any of the following criteria or procedures (or other equivalent procedures). i
- _ _ ~ - - . -
3-16
- a. h computer program is a recognized program in the public domain, and has had sufficient history of use to justify its applicability and validity without further demonstration. h dated program version that will be used, the software or operating system, and the computer hardware configuration must be specified to be accepted by virtue of its history of use.
i I
- b. The computer program's solutions to a series of test problems, with accepted results, have been demonstrated to be substantially identical to those obtained by a similar, independently written
- program in the public domain. h test problems should be ,
-4 demonstrated to be similar to or with the range of applicability 7,
for the problems analyzed by the computer program to justify
.', acceptance of the program.
l
- ..) c. h program's solutions to a series of test problems are sub-i 9
stantially identical to those obtained by hand calculations or from accepted experimental test or analytical results published
- in technical literature. The test problems should be demonstrated l
to be similar to the problems analyzed to justify acceptance of the program. Provide a summary comparison of the results obtained from each computer 3.29 program with either the results derived from a similar program in the public domain, on a previously approved computer program or results
- i. from the test problems. ,
i a
'3-17
').10 . Section 3.3.2.1.3 providos a description of design basis tornado-borne missiles considered for this facility. F.xpand the spectrum of tornado missiles considered to include the following, asstsaing that the tornado has a 300 mph rotational wind velocity plus a 60 mph translational velocity:
- a. 4" x 12" plank x 12 ft long with a density of 50 lbs/f t3;
- b. Utility pole 13.5" diam. x 35 f t long with a density of 43 lbs/ft ;
- c. 1," solid steel rod 3 f t long with a density of 490 lbs/f t ;
- d. 6" schedule 40 pipe,15 f t long with a density of 490 lbs/f t 3; and
- e. 12" schedule 40 pipe,15 f t long with a density of 490 lbs/f t .
' ,! Present the following information for each of the above:
- a. The maximum velocity attained.
- b. The required thickness of a reinforced concrete missila barri-
' er to stop the missiles without their penetrating the missile barrier or creating secondary missiles (assuming an end-on im-
, pact, i.e. , the minimum impact area) .
in developing the above information, use the analytical approach presented in WCAP-7897, Characteristics of Tornado Generated Mis-siles, except assume the missiles do not tumble and are at all times oriented such as to have the maximum value of C A while in d W fli gh t. Since the potential destructive forces that can be devel-oped varies with the elevation difference between where the missile
3-18 originated and its impact area (to be assumed at ground level), present the above information for missiles originating at ground level and at increasing elevations in increments of 50 feet up to the highest structural elevation on the site. 3.31 With the aid of site plot plans and layout drawings of Units 1 and 2, identify and locate all essential systems and components that are required in order to attain a safe shutdown in the event of a tornado, including all control, sensing, power and cooling lines. Using the missile barrier thicknesses developed in response to request 3.30 above, discuss the adequacy of all tornado missile barriers protecting the essential systems. t I
.e f
0 0 (
1 i 11-1 11.0 RADI0 ACTIVE WASTE MANAGEMErr 11.1 The flow diagrams for the boron recycle, steam generator blowdown treatment, liquid, and gaseous waste treatment systems do not show the flow rates through the systems. Provide the expected and mexi-num flow rates and activity concentrations for the principal flow paths of these systems. 11.2 The 100 scf/yr estimated -wi== leakage rate from the gaseous waste l processing system is based on the sensitivity of commercially avail-able portable leak detection apparatus. Discuss how you will assure that the actual leak rate from the gaseous waste processing system will not exceed 100 scf/yr; e.g., discussion of monitors, preventive maintenance, and other measures.
+
.1.3 Provide the following additional information which is necessary for our evaluation of the gaseous waste processing system; 4
- a. Measures taken to monitor the system for explosive gas mixtures, t
I
- b. Measures taken to mitigate the consequences of an explosion in the system,
- c. Justification for locating the hydrogen recombiners downstream from the gas compressors, where the hydrogen concentration will be higher, and
- d. Measures taken to avoid explosive gas mixtures.
~
l
11-2
-0 ,,7 ,3), two-inch charcoal 11.4 At low concentrations of iodine (10 adsorbers have been shown to be relatively inefficient. Provide the depths of the charcoal adsorbers used to reduce airborne radio-iodine releases from the various ventilation exhausts; i.e., auxil-isry building, fuel handling area, air ejector exhaust and contain-ment purge.
~
11.5 It is required (10 CFR 50.36a) that each of the principal radio-g nuclides released to unrestricted areas be identified. It is not clear that all ventilation effluent discharge paths are, monitored for particulates, iodines, and noble gases. Provide the mon 1Loring
. capability and the design minimum detectable concentrations for each
; ventilation discharge path, i.e., plant vent, containment exhaust vent, gland seal condenser vent, main condenser air ejector vent,
.>, and turbine building exhaust. It is not clear that all liquid effluent discharge paths will be isotopically monitored before release; i.e. , steam generator blowdown treatment system effluent.
Discuss the capability to determine the isotopic releases from this l
.. ; stream.
11.6 It is not evident from figure 10.4-1 that the steam generator blow-down sampling line will directly monitor the untreated discharge that is stated to flow through the bypass filter to the plant dis-charge line. Provide the following additional information:
- = . ,
11-3
- a. Sufficient information on the location of monitors to demonstrate
- that the sample line will be representative of the untreated discharge,
- b. Design minimum detectable concentration for the sample monitor, and,
- c. Quantity and bases for the quantity of radioactivity that could be released through this stream undetected.
11.7 Provide the estimated releases of radionuclides from the turbine building floor drains and ventilation exhausts for ewpected and abnormal conditions. 11.8 Provide the criteria that will be used to select the piping that will not be field-run; but will inste ad have a detail layout. 11.9 If the boron recycle bottoms cannot be discharged to the boric acid tanks, they can be diverted to the solid waste processing system. Section 11.5 does not describe the capability for processing these radioactive boric acid wastes. Discuss the capability for processing the boron recycle bottoms for disposal. O 4 9
i
- s
~
13-1 13.0' CONDUCT OF OPERATIONS 13.1 Sections 13.1.1.2.2 and 13.1.1.2.2.5 of your PSAR describe the responsibilities of the Superintendent of Production-Nuclear and his staff in regard to headquarters' technical support for opera-tion of the Georgia Power Company's nuclear power plants. The planned increase to a total of six nuclear units represented by this application will increase the demands upon this staff. Indi-cate your plans for providing adequate staffing to fulfill these obligations. 13.2 Safety Guide No. 17 identifies the need to consider, at an early stage, design features and equipment arrangements to reduce the probability for successful industrial sabotage. Describe how you plan to review for and incorporate these considerations into the design of the Vogtle plant. 9 6
g UNITED STATES ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION C. M WASHINGTON. D.C. 20545 Docket Nos. 50-424 November 5,1973 50-425 50-426 50-427 , APPLICANT: Georgia Power Company FACILITY: Alvin W. Vogtle Nuclear Plant
SUMMARY
OF MEETING RE GE01DGY AND SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION FOR THE V0GTLE SITE A meeting was held in Bethesda on November 1,1973, to discuss additional subsurf ace exploration at the Vogtle site and site geology. Attendees are indicated in the enclosure. Question 2.26 had asked for additional site exploration work to verify the data presented in the PSAR. The applicant had performed this addi-tional work and reported on the results during the meeting. After listening to the presentation, the staff agreed that, when documented, the additional material would be sufficient. Our consultant, USGS, had questioned the actual location of the power block for the Vogtle site relative to the underlying Triassic basin, and the proximity to possible fault lines along the basin boundary. This subject was discussed, but not resolved, at the meeting. The staff indicated that additional effort would be required to obtain more pre-cise locations of the basin boundaries to the northwest and southeast of the site and to determine whether the marl underlying the site is continuous acr' o ss these boundaries. The applicant will obtain more infor-
- mation regarding these matters.
All information presented during the meeting as well as the additional information to be obtained will be filed as soon as possible.
/ e
,/ f/ i.A t Gli '
L. P. Crocker Project Manager, PWR-2 Directorate of Licensing i Enclosure I [OS1 .
~ '
r; ,
, . . 47 l
l i V0GTLE MEETING November 1.1973 , l AEC , L. P. Crocker W. P. Gassill S. M. Cop'lan A. T. Cardone Be ch te_1
< D. G. Campbell W. R.' Ferris C. Cunningham J. A. Blanke Cole MCClure -
P. L. Goodman M. R. Thaker Georgia Power Company W. V. Conn G. S. Grainger SSI Osen Batum I' , Southern Services R. A. Thomas - F. E. Ehrensperger fi' M. J. Crisler p Office Chief of Enaineers Norman A. Dixon U.S.G.S. R. H. Morris i
, P' e
I
\g
. . 1
&p l ^ " "
U[lTA* TION,CFFER AND AWARD 1CgegSA ' E ANO/ OUS EG.1 96 RACES
- 6. H EQu 5ITIGNfPURCHASE 2.CONTRACTno. 3. 50LaciTATION No. 4.lvPE OF SQLiC6TATION 5.DA"E155wEO "O*
l ADVE RTISEO (IF B) RS-RES-84-128 g Neco7,47,o in,,, 5/7/84 RES-84-128
- 7. 455uto ev CODE I W $8Ea'fs'Mid'W"aMessed as indicated in U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Block 7, however, handcarried proposals, (this Division of Contracts \ includes Express Mail and all comercial delivery Washington, DC 20555 services) must be delivered to the address in R i m- te O NOTE: In advertised selecitations " offer" and "of feror" mean "tsd" and "b dder" ' ' ~
SOLICITATION 9 Seated offers in original and fi va ( 5 ) - coo,e, for furnisning ene suopi,es or serv,ces in ene Seneduie will em received at ene piece specif.ed in item 8. or if Rm. 7771. ARRn Mnntnnmarv Ave n t ia 6/7 /84 handcarried. in the depository listed in ' until@' " iocat time '*"' Bethesda, MD 20814 ~ CAUTION - LATE Submissions. Modifications, and withdrawais: See Section 1, Provision No. 52.21 A-7 or 52.21510. All offers are sutMect to all terms and conditions contaened in this solicitation. A.NAME 8. TELEPHONE NO. tinclude erwe todos (NO COLLECT CALL 36
'#' Mr. Levi Baisden (301) 492-4289
" C'"AL"" * ' " )
- 11. TA8LE OP CONTENTS OESCRIPTION lPAGE(S) 6f1l SEC. I DESCRIPTION lPAGE(S)
I/)lSEC l PART e - THE SCHEDULE PA R T 11 - CONT R ACT CLAUSES Xl 1 l CONTR ACT CLAUSES l X A GOLICITATION/ CONTRACT FORM 8 $UPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICES / COSTS PART lli - LIST OF OCCUMENTS. ExHIGITS ANO OTHER ATT ACH. X j X C OESCRIPTION/ SPECS / WORK STATEMENT Y l J l LIST OF ATTACHMENTS , O PACKAGING ANO MARKING DART IV - REPRESENTATIONS ANO INSTRUCTIONS X
- X E INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE g REPRESENTATIONS. CERTIFICATIONS ANO X OTHER STATEMENTS OF OFFEPORS X F DELIVERIES OR PERFORMANCE G CONTR ACT ADMINISTRATION OATA X L INSTR $ . CONOS.. ANO NOTICES TO OFFER X
H ' SPECI AL CONTRACT REQUIREMcNTS X M I EVALUATION F ACTORS FOR AWARO X OF F E R (Must be fully completed by otNrori NOTE. Item 12 does not sooty 6f the solicitation includes the provisions at $2.21416. Minimum SU Accootence Period. calendar days S0,e,ande, de,, un,*4e e diff,,ent 12 In comotience ete the above. the undersigned e4 ees,if this of for is accepted within period is inserted by the e/feror) from the date foi receept of of fers soecified above, to furnish any or all items woon which prices are offered at the Crice set opposite eacn item. delivered at the designated tio nt(s), ethin the time soecified in the scredule. J > GALENOAR DAv5 Jo CALENGAR OAv 5 Jo G AL NOA A DA4 CALENOAR OAv 13 OISCOUNT FOR PROMPT PAYMENT % ISee Section f. Cloute No. 32 232 8p of % % AMENOMENT NO DATE AMENOMENT NO 1 OATE 14 ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF AMENOMENTS (The oftevor ethnowledoes recelot of amend. l ments to the SOLICITATION for offerere one l related doewments numbered and deced- 4 RSON AuT r*OMiZEO TO sign CODE l l PAC #LITY l Ao y,M E,AgD]i T,L E tl A. NAME ANO AOORESS OF
#1F F E RO M
~ 4 a. OF FE H DA TE ise. T ELEPHONE NO. tinesuae stee 15C CHECK tF REMITTANCE AOORESS 47SiGNANRL codes iS nippERENT FROM A80VE ENTER SUCH ADORf S', IN SCHF OULF AWARO ITo be como/oted by Governmente _
49 AGCEPIEQ AS TO eTEMS NuMelERED 20. AMOUNT al. ACCOUNf 6NG AND A##RODRI AfiON
## "' " ""#"U 22 $U8MIT INVOICf S TO ACORESS SHOWN IN d" I ta coPiee masvu einerwise steestleds P [ 10 V $ C. 2304tal (
J 6. PA v MEN T wiL6 SE M ADE OV
) [ 41 U $ C 252tcl I cogg l U"IDTIINiST E M ED isv elf other then frem 18 CODE j J4 NAMEOll G ON T H AC T 6NG Op p scE H # Dpe or peints 21. UNITIO $f ATES OF AMERICA Ja AwAh00AT i' rSignetore of cantreeting Offier.# ,,
bPOR T ANT - Award w.it be morte on tNs Poem or en Stentford S nem 7t1 or by otner owthorided othe#48 written notief 3 3.g 33 o,o ,,e4 o.434ag t STANDARD FORM 33 (REv to il r$1 7940.01.152 4044 **eureDee De Os A kEveOUS EDIfION NOf USAsLE P AR (at CFR)la Jiatti
n RS-RES-84-128 Page 2 Section 8 - Supplies or Services and Prices / Cost 8.1 Brief Description of Work , The Contractor shall develop geophysical and geological information that will identify and differentiate the range of theories that may help explain the course of seismicity near Charleston, South Carolina. 8.2 '(Offeror should provide Cost and Fee information) Total Estimated Cost $ Fixed Fee $ , Total Estimated Cost Plus Fixed Fee $
'Section C - Description / Specifications / Work .
C.1 General C.1.1 The Contractor shall perform this project pursuant to the , requirements of this contract in a manner conforming to high professional standards. C.1.2 The Contractor shall be responsible for obtaining all necessary permits or licenses and abide by all applicable laws, regulations, and ordinances of the United States and the State, territory, and political subdivision in which this project is performed. C.2 Statement of Work l C.2.1 Introduction . In 1886 the Charleston, South Carolina region experienced one of the largest earthquakes in the recorded history of the eastern United States. The cause of this earthquake and of the continuing relatively , high level of seismicity in that area remains unknown. A large amount of data has been gathered in studies supported, in part, by the USGS and i the NRC. These data have served to formulate hypotheses concerning the source of the seismic activity, but a clear decision on which hypothesis is the correct one, or even the most probable one, has not been reached. . ! The question of the cause of the seismicity at Charleston is part of the i larger problem of defining the cause of seismicity in the eastern United j States and of estimating the severity and probability of occurrence of i earthquakes near nuclear facilities. The criteria used by the NRC in I establishing design values for earthquake ground motion, as described in Appendix A to 10 CFR Part 100, require that the seismicity in a given location be correlated with tectonic structures or tectonic provinces.
; In the eastern United States, correlation of seismicity with specific tectonic features, such as faults, has proven to be difficult. The resulting reliance on tectonic provinces also presents difficulties,
' because of the generally low rate of recurrence of earthquakes in the i eastern United States, and because the seismicity is not restricted to 4 or typical of any specific tectonic province as defined on the basis of Appendix A. h L .C q ,
..g.~ $,
~
RS-RES-84-128 Page 3 The work to be done as a result of this RFP will contribute to NRC's capability to reduce uncertainties in estimating seismic risk to nuclear facilities. In particular, the aim of this work is to more clearly define the cause of the seismicity at Charleston, including the 1886 earthquake. C.2.2 Background Investigations into the cause of the Charleston, South Carolina earthquake of 1886 have been conducted since the event happened and have been intensified in recent years. These investigations have produced a wealth of data and a number of hypotheses. However, none of the hypotheses seems to be clearly superior to' the others in explaining the cause of the seismicity. The subsurface near Charleston, as it has been defined recently based on geological and geophysical investigations, consists of a Paleozoic or , older crystalline basement overlain by Mesozoic and Cenozoic sediments with a Jurassic basalt layer in the lower part of the sedimentary section (Yantis et al.,1983; Hamilton et al.,1983). Several faults have been defined, mostly by geophysical means, for instance the Cooke fault, the Helena Banks fault offshore, and the postulated decollement between the. basement and the overlying sedimentary section with associated listric faults (Harris and Boyer, 1979; Behrendt et al., 1983). The decollement is considered a shoreward extension of an overthrust found farther west in the southern Appalachians (Cook et al., 1979 and 1981). Triassic-Jurassic basins and possible Mesozoic rifting also occur in the Atlantic coastal plain, buried under more recent . sediments (Danielsetal.,1983;ChownsandWilliams,1983). A number of hyupotheses have been advanced to explain the seismicity at Charleston. An overview of some of the recent work and theories can be found in the USGS Open File Report 83-843. The hypotheses could be grouped as follows, although it must be borne in mind that some theories . overlap with others and that different ways to group them can be found:
- 1. Reactivation of the decollement surface and associatd listric faults, either by gravity sliding or through compressional forces.
and aided by a saprolite layer between the crystalline basement and the sedimentary rocks (Armbruster, and Seeber,1981). ,
- 2. Vertical faults (a) NE trending reverse faults (Wentworth and Mergner Keefer, 1981 and 1983?, (b) NW trending normal or strike-slip faults (Rankin,1976; Talwani,1983), which may or .may not be onshore extensions of oceanic fracture zones (Fletcher and .
Sykes,1979).
- 3. Reactivation of Triassic border faults or rifts.
- 4. Stress amplification on mafic plutons.
- 5. Faults associates with basement province boundaries (Popence and Zietz,1977).
RS-RES-84-128 Page 4
- 6. Effects of topography or bur'ied structures.
- 7. Other hypotheses.
The mechanism of fault movements should in each case be consistent with the orientation of the maximum compressive stress. There is still considerable uncertainty about the tectonic stress direction in this area. Zoback and Zoback (1980) indicated an approximate NW direction for the maximum compressive stress based on in situ stress measuren.ents, focal mechanisms and geologic data. However, newer interpretations of borehole data seem to indicate a northeasterly stress direction. Talwani and Colquhoun (1982) have concluded from stratigraphic and geomorphic data that the stress direction has changed from NW in the Tertiary to NE at present. It is also possible that stress directions near the surface are different from those at depth. - In a wider context, the suspected causes for the Charleston seismicity need to be compared to other areas with higher levels of seismicity on the East Coast, such as the Central Virginia seismic zone, the Giles County, Virginia area, and the Ramapo fault zone in New York and New Jersey. For the Central Virginia seismic zone and the Ramapo fault, the theory competent highly has been advanced rock suchthat the seismicity Ramapo) as carbonates (occurs on buried layers of or metamorphosed volcanics (Central VA) (Glover and Costain,1983). In Giles County and in eastern Tennessee, the depths of hypocenters indicate that the seismic activity is concentrated in the crystalline basement and not in the sedimentary rocks. Similarly, at Charleston most of the hypocentral depths calculated are in the range of 3-13 km, which again places the seismic activity in the crystalline basement (Dewey, 1983; Tarr and Rhea, 1983). Recent seismological studies (Talwani, 1983; Bollinger, 1983) suggest that movement ha occurred in different phases. Earlier movements, including the main shock, may'have occurred on NE trending faults, whereas more recent seismic activity suggests movement along NW trending structures (Talwani,1983). Work in progress that pertains to this problem includes NRC contracts for seismic networks operating in the southeastern region, a series of geological and geophysical studies in cooperation with the USGS, a probabilistic study by EPRI, and planned neotectonic investigations and stress measurements. This RFP in intended, in concert with these other programs, to clarify the possible causes of the seismicity at Charleston by geophysical or geological means. The fact that most of the seismicity occurs at basement depths dictates the use of geophysics. Orilling, as the only direct way of obtaining confirmation, is too costly, especially in view of the uncertainty as to which location should be chosen to find the proof sought. Geophysical methods lend themselves to exploring deep-seated structures. However, geophysical information is indirect, and a balance has to be found between seismic methods that are expensive but provide detailed information and other methods that are less expensive and less accurate. An effective plan of exploration should make'use of the capabilities of .,' sl
RS-RES-84-128 Page 6 C.2.4.3 Subtask Ib - Analysis of Hypotheses The Contractor shall analyze the hypotheses listed in Subtask la as to how well they are supported by the available data. Questions to be analyzed shall include but not necessarily be limited to the following:
- How well is each hypothesis supported by data?
- What evidence is there against each hypothesis? -
- What theories or data sets are mutually exclusive?
- What are the most important data gaps, either with respect to types of data or with respect to spatial distribution of the information?
- What are the most viable hypotheses?
- What data are missing to prove or disprove the most viable hypotheses?
C.2.4.4 Subtask Ic - Proposed Fie.1 Work The Contractor shall propose a plan for field work and analyses designed to resolve remaining questions about the cause of the Charleston seismicity. A major purpose of this work is to obtain information on crustal structure or tectonic processes at hypocentral depths to resolve tectonic processes at crustal levels that are not easily accessible from the surface. However, shallower neotectonic data may also be used to shed light on the mechanism of seismicity. Using the results listed in Subtask Ib, the Contractor shall specify the types of geological, geophysical, or seismological methods that will be needed to resolve remaining uncertainties, and the locations in which field work should be conducted. The required field work and analyses shall then be combined into a detailed plan and schedule for Task 2. Methods of investigation that may be used include, among others, seismic reflection or refraction; magnetic, gravity, and possibly magnetotelluric measurements; remote sensing, satellite imagery; and combined interpretation of these and other available data. It is expected that the greater benefit will be derived from a combined interpretation of different sets of data. The Contractor should make as much use as possible of available data, such as existing oil company seismic data that can be acquired and reprocessed, and existing magnetic and gravity data that can be augmented and/or intepreted using modern methods. It is highly important that proper steps be taken to coordinate this work with the data base and investigations being performed by the USGS, the University of South Carolina, and EPRI. It is also important to avoid unnecessary duplication although some overlap may be unavoidable due to the broad scope of some of the other investigations. The result of this work shall be a report on Task 1, which includes the plan for Task 2. The Contractor ,shall not proceed on Task 2 until written consent is received from the NRC project officer. The e og e,
~. _ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ . . . __ _ _ . ..I ...
RS-RES-84-128 Page 5 the various_.. methods available and take into account the synergistic effects of data derived from different sources. C.2.3 Contract Objectives The purpose of this contract is to develop geophysical and geological information that will permit defining the cause of the seismicity near Charleston, South Carolina or narrowing down the range of theories that may explain it. The work to be done must take into account the information available at this time and be coordinated with studies in progess, such as the neotectonic investigations in this area. C.2.4 Scope of Work . The Contractor shall provide all labor, equipment, and services to conduct Tasks 1 and 2. The Contractor is responsible for obtaining necessary permission to conduct field investigations and is responsible for any damages. The NRC shall provide coordination of this work with other NRC funded projects in the Charleston area. The Contractor shall not begin on Task 2 without written consent from the NRC project ; officer. In addition to the normal reporting requirements, the Contractor shall keep the NRC project officer advised of any significant j developments or findings in this project. 4 C.2.4.1 Task 1 - Data Analysis and Research Plan Task I has the purpose of reviewing existing data on the seismicity, structure, and tectonics of the area, of analyzing hypotheses concerning the origin of the seismicity at Charleston, and of formulating a plan for subsequent field work to resolve remaining questions about the cause of the seismicity. The purpose of this task to not to compile a data ; , base but to analyze the data base in existence, and this analysis shall only be carried to the extent necessary to plan for Task 2. . Existing i i data are meant to be data and interpretations that can be found in the ' literature ;or in available files, open files, etc. The task is 1 subdivided into three subtasks. - C.2.4.2 Subtask la - Outline of Existing Data and Hypotheses l The Contractor shall compile information on the Charleston , South
- Carolina earthquake and continued seismicity in that area, including all important research done to date. Information to be gathered shall i include essential geological, geophysical, and seismological data and the locations where the work was performed. EPRI and 1ts contractors <
are developing a data base on the geology, geophysics and seismicity of
- the eastern U.S. These data can be made available for this NRC project, i and the work expended on collecting this data base must not be
duplicated. The Contractor shall itst all hypotheses that have been . l proposed to explain the seismicity, and the reasons or data that support ! each hypothesis. [
- t l I
[ i i
=
RS-RES-84-128 Page 6 C.2.4.3 Subtask Ib - Analysis of Hypotheses The Contractor shall analyze the hypotheses listed in Subtask la as to how well they are supported by the available data. Questions to be analyzed shall include but not necessarily be limited to the following:
- How well is each hypothesis supported by data?
- What evidence is there against each hypothesis? -
- What theories or data sets are mutually exclusive?
- What are the most important data gaps, either with respect to types of data or with respect to spatial distribution of the information?
- What are the most viable hypotheses?
- What data are missing to prove or disprove the most viable hypotheses?
C.2.4.4 Subtask Ic - Proposed Fie.1 Work The Contractor shall propose a plan for field work and analyses designed tn resolve remaining questions about the cause of the Charleston seismicity. A major purpose of this work is to obtain information on crustal structure or tectonic processes at hypocentral depths to resolve tectonic processes at crustal levels that are not easily accessible from the surface. However, shallower neotectonic data may also be used to shed light on the mechanism of seismicity. Using the results listed in Subtask lb, the Contractor shall specify the' types of geological, geophysical, or seismological methods that will be needed to retolve remaining uncertainties, and the locations in which field work shou d be conducted. The required field work and analyses shall then be comtined into a detailed plan and schedule for Task 2. Methods of investigation that may be used include, among others, se'smic reflection or refraction; magnetic, gravity, and posalbly magnetotelluric measurements; remote sensing, satellite imagery, and combined interpretation of these and other available data. It is expected that the greater benefit will be derived from a combined interpretation of different sets of data. The Contractor should make as much use as possible of available data, such as existing oil company seismic data that can be acquired and reprocessed, and existing magnetic and gravity data that can be augmented and/or intepreted using modern methods. It is highly important that proper steps be ttken to coordinate this work with the data base and investigations being performed by the USGS, the University of South Carolina, and EPRI. It is also important to avoid unnecessary duplication although some overlap may be unavoidable due to the broad scope of some of the other investigations. The result of this work shall be a report on Task 1, which includes the plan for Task 2. The Contractor ,shall not proceed on Task 2 until written consent is received from the NRC project officer. The e i' og .,
.8 ,,
RS-RES-84-128 Page 7 Contractor should receive consent or comments within 30 working days after submittal of the plan. C.2.5 Task 2 - Field Work, Intepretation, and Synthesis After written approval from the NRC project officer, field work and analysis shall be carried out in accordance with the work plan established in Task 1. The Contractor must notify the project officer of any significant undertaking, such as seismic field work, so that an NRC representative may be present during data acquisition. The type of field investigation employed in this task may include seismic reflection, gravity or magnetic measurements, confirmatory geologic mapping, or other methods. Accompanying office investigations may include, among others, analyzing air photos, satellite maps, and other remote sensing imagery. An important part of these investigations
- shall be a combined interpretation of d.ta from different geophysical and geological methods.
These investigations shall be conducted according to accepted industry standards and shall be documented in accordance with quality assurance procedures that will permit tracing of work performed and results obtained. Results from these investigations shall be analyzed together with previously known information to arrive at a synthesis of the facts that explains, in as much detail as possible, the reasons for and tectonic processes associated with the seismicity at Charleston. The results and itnerpretations shall be presented in a final report. C.3 Level of Effort A. The NRC's estimate of the total of scientific, technical, and clerical effort for this project is approximately 3 1/2 staff years.* This infonnation is advisory and is not to be considered as the sole basis for the development of your staffing plans. You must detail how you intend to accomplish each objective covered herein.
- Excluding option year B. Depending on the results of the work and other considerations, there may be a Task 3 which continues the work outlined for Task 2. In Task 3, the Contractor shall perform selected geophysical and/or geological field investigations on which the results of Task 2 that have shown to be necessary to resolve remaining uncertainties and which are feasible to conduct and analyze within a year. The data obtained from these field investigations shall be analyzed and integrated with the work of Task 2, and a report describing the additional work and insights gained from it shall be issued within 12 months from the start of Task 3.
u_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _W
RS-RES-84-128 Page 8 C.4 Meetings and Travel , A. Meetinos
. It is anticipated that the following meetings shall be held at the option of the NRC at the NRC Headquarters office. Silver Spring, MD:
- 1. A kickoff meeting within 30 days from the effective date of the contract.
- 2. A meeting at the conclusion of Task l'to report findings.
- 3. A meeting after some, field work results have become available.
- 4. A meeting at the conclusion of Task 2 to present results and the final report.
Note: For the purpose of preparing a proposal, offerors shall assume that all these meetings will occur and that each meeting will last 1 day. Section 0 - Packaging and Marking 0.1 The Contractor shall use standard commercial packaging for all items tJ be delivered unless specified othemise. Section E - Inspection and Acceptance 52.246-5 INSPECTION OF SERVICES--COST-RE!MBURSEMENT. (APR1984) (a) Definition. " Services," as used in this clause, includes services performed, workmanship, and material furnished or used in performing services. (b) The Contractor shall provide and maintain an inspection system acceptable to the Government covering the services under this contract. Complete records of all inspection work perfomed by the Contractor shall be maintained and made available to the Government during contract perfomance and for as long aftemards as the contract requires. (c) The Government has the right to inspect and test all services called for by the contract, to the extent practicable at all places and times during the tem of the contract. The Government shall perfom inspections and tests in a manner that will not unduly delay the work. (d) If any of the services performed do not confom with contract requirements, the Government may require the Contractor to perform the services again in confomity with contract requirements, for no additional fee. When the defects in services cannot be corrected by reperfomance, the Government may (1) require the Contractor to take necessary action to ensure that future perfomance confoms to contract requirements and (2) reduce any fee payable under the contract to reflect the reduced value of the services perfomed. (e) If the Contractor fails to promptly perfom the services again or take the action necessary to ensure future performance in confomity with contract requirements, the Government may (1) by contract or othemise, perfom the services and reduce any fee payable by an amount that is equitable under the circumstances or (2) terminate the contract for default. (End of clause) (R7-1909.51971NOV) J ')
o :o , RS-RES-84-128 Page 9 Section F - Deliveries and Performance F.1 Reports, Documentation and other Deliverable End Items The task reports listed below are to be written and disseminated in accordance with NRC Manual Chapter 3202. A. Business Letter Report , A monthly business letter report will be submitted by the 15th of the renth to the RES Project Officer with copies provided to the Contracting Officer, the Director, Division of Health, Siting and Waste Management, ATTN: Frank J. Arsenault, and to ARCS /RMB. These reports will identify the title of the Work Assignment, the contract
- number, the FIN, the Principal Investigator, the period of performance, and the reporting period and will contain two sections as follows:
- 1. Project Status Section
- a. A listing of the efforts completed during the period; milestones reached, or if missed, an explanation provided.
- b. Any problems or delays encountered or anticipated and recommendations for resolution.*
- c. A summary of progress to date expressed by narrative and percentage completion for the Work Assignment.
- d. Plans for the next reporting period.
- 2. Financial Status Section
, 4. Provide the total cost (value) of the Work Assignment as reflected in the proposal, the total amount of funds male available in the contract to date for the Work Assignment, and the balance of funds required to complete the work by fiscal year as follows:
Total Funds Balance of Funds Projected Obligated 8y Fiscal Year Project Cost To Date Fy- FY- FY-J. Provide the total amount of funds expended (costed) during the period and total cumulative to date in the following categories: Current Cumulative Period Total l
- a. Direct Labor l
- b. Indirect Labor
- c. ADP Support
- d. Travel
- e. Subcontracts
- f. Equipment & Materials ;
- g. Overhead (GAA)
! ~ :
b R$-RES-84-128 ! Page 10 !
- h. Fee !
TOTAL- - . ( z)** i
- If the recommended resolution involves a contract 2
- modification,)e.g., change in work requirements. level ofeffort (costs r
- should be prepared and submitted to the Contracting Officer i
with copies provided to the Director. Division of Health. Siting and Waste Management. ATTN: Frank J. Arsenault, to the RES Project Officer and to ARC $/Rft. {
** Provide percentage against total funds in the contract to
- All.t* !
B. Quarterly Reports , The Contractor shall ~ rovide quarterly letter pr ress reports in ! five (5) copies to t Project Officer and one 1) copy to the ', Contracting Officer. The report shall concern each 3-month period l beginning with the effective date of the contract and be submitted ; I within 15 days after the close of the period. The report shall ' enable the reviewers and other readers to grasp the main ideas and , findings. An expanded monthly report may serve as a guarterly report, , i ! C. Task Reports and the Final Resort
. The Contractor shall submit reports at the end of Task 1 and Task 2. l The report should detail the. work done during the task. The report t should include a description of all findings and have sufficient {
discussions, references. location of field invistigations and appropriate maps and graphs so that the conclusior can be eva usted by a knowledgeable reader. With the permission of the NRC Project j Officer the Task 2 report may also serve as the Final Report. The
- Final Report should also be suitable for utilintion by the NRC in ;
the formulation of a NUREG. Distribution shall to as follows: ! I l . Contracting Officer 1 copy 4 j- Project Officer 10 copies t i Frank J. Arsenault. Director ' Division of Health. Siting. and Weste Management 1 copy l l l Office of the Director i Office of Nuclear Regulatory i Research.. ATTN: Administration
- and Resource Control Staff I copy Document Control Center Division of Weste Management !
- Office of Nuclear Material i Safety and Safeguards 1 copy 1
g . . !
. . h
.i. ...
RS-RES-84-128 Page 11 l D. Microfiche Copies
.In addition to the reporting requirements delineated above, microfiche copies of all interim and ffnal . reports shall be provided and such microfiche shall conform to the following specifications:
- 1. source documentation shall conform to the Microfiche NMA Type 1containing(ANSI format /NMA MS.5)consisting of 98 frames arranged in 7 rows and 14 columns. ;
- 2. The reduction. ratio shall be 24:1 for all microfiche.
- 3. The microfiche shall be standard 148 m x 105mm.
- 4. The microfiche shall be one (1) silver-halide master and one (1) <
diazo placed in individual acid-free envelopes. !
- 5. Diazo duplicates may be either blue / black or black. l;
- 6. The microfiche shall be titled in the following manner: l FIN No. Title of Report Date f Contract No. .
NURES/CR No. ' Fiche No. Fiche number refers to 1 of 2, 2 of 2 etc., information. f L
- 7. Title information shall be eye-readable on a clear background. [
- 8. The submittal of microfiche containing proprietary material shall be coordinated with the Document Management Branch,
. Division of Technical Information and Document Control. U.S. f Nuclear Regulatory Comission, to set format and procedures for ,
submittal.
- g. Foldouts, if any, shall be segmented and filmed in logical order.
- 10. The first frame shall be blank, and the second frame shall contain the resolution target (NS$ 1010A). -
- 11. Questions on microfiche specifications should be submitted in writing to ,
Document Management Branch . t Olvision of Technical Information and Document Control ' U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission
- Washington, DC 20555 ,
- 12. Ons (1) master microfiche of the reports shall be sent to the ,
same address. l i i L
e ,.
, RS-RES-84-128 Page 11a References Behrendt, John C., Robert M. Hamilton, Hans D. Ackermann, V. James Henry, and Kenneth C. Bayer, 1983, Marine multichannel seismic-reflection evidence for Cenozoic faulting and deep crustal structure near Charleston, South Carolina.
U.S. Geol. Survey, Prof. Paper 1313, Gregory S. Gohn, Ed. , 8ollinger, G. A.,1983 Speculations on the nature of seismicity at Charleston, South Carolina. U.S. Geol. Survey, Prof. Paper 1313. Gregory S. Gohn, Ed. . Chowns , T. M., and C. T. Williams, 1983 Pre-Cretaceous rocks beneath the Georgia Coastal Plain - Regional Implications. U.S. Geol. Survey, Prof. paper 1313, Gregory S.*Gohn, Ed. Cook, F. A. , D. S. Albaugh, L. D. Brown, Sidney Kaufman, J. E. Oliver, and R. D. Hatcher, Jr., 1979, Thin-skinned tectonics in the crystalline southern Appalachians, C0 CORP seismic reflection profiling of the Blue Ridge and Piedmont. Geology, v. 7. no. 12, p. 563-567. Cook, F. A., L. D. Brown Sidney Kaufman, J. E. Oliver, and T. A. Petersen, 1981, C0 CORP sesimic profiling of the Appalachian orogen beneath the Coastal Plain of Georgia. Geol. Soc. of America Bulletin, v. 92, p. 738-744. Daniels, David L. , Isidore Zietz and Peter Popenoe, 1983, Distribution of subsurface lower Mesozoic rocks in the Southeastern United States as interpreted from regional aeromagnetic and gravity maps. U.S. Geol. Survey, Prof. Paper .' 1313 Gregory S. Gohn, Ed. Dewey, James W., 1983, Relocation of instrumentally recorded pre-1974 earthquakes in the South Carolina region. U.S. Geol. Survey, Prof. Paper 1313, Gregory S. Gohn, Ed. Fletcher, J. B., M. Sbar, and L. Sykes,1978. Seismic Trends and Travel-Time Residuals in Eastern North America and Their Tectonic Implications: Geol. Soc. of America Bulletin, v. 89, p.1656-1676. Hamilton, Robert M., John C. Behrendt and Hans 0. Ackermann, 1983 Land multichannel seismic reflection evidence for tectonic features near Charleston, South Carolina. U.S. Cool. Survey, Prof. Paper 1313, Gregory S. Gohn, Ed. Harris, L. D., and K. C. Bayer,1979, Sequential development of the Appalachian orogen above a master decollement - A hypothesis. Geology, v. 7, no. 12, p. 568 572. I Popence, Peter, and Isidore Zietz,1977 The Nature of the Geophysical Basement i Beneath the Coastal Plain of South Carolina and Northeastern Georgia. U.S. Geol. Survey, Prof. Paper 1028, Douglas W. Rankin, Ed. ! Rankin, D. W., 1976 Appalachian Saltents and Recesses: Late Precambrian Continental Breakup and the Opening of the tapetus Oceant Jour. Geophys. Res.,
- v. 81, no. 32, p. 5605 5619.
t 1-
RS-RES-84-128 Page lib Talwani, P.,1982, Internally Consistent Pattern of Seismicity Near Charleston, South Carolina; Geology, v. 10, p. 654-658 December 1982. Talwant, P., and D. J. Colquhoun. 1982 The Ashley River fault and the Charleston earthquakes (Abstract). EOS, v. 63, no. 45, p. 1025. ' Tarr, Arthur C. , and Susan Rhea, 1983, Seismicity near Charleston, South Carolina, March 1973 to December 1979. U.S. Geol. Survey, Prof. Paper 1313, Gregory S. Gohn, Ed. U.S. Geological Survey, '1983, Proceedings of Conference XX: A Workshop on "The 1886 Charleston, South Carolina. Earthquake and Its Implications for Today." Open File Report 83-843, Walter W. Hayes and Paula L. Gori Eds. Wentworth, Carl M., and Marcia hergner-Keefer, 1981, Reverse faulting and M., potential for largeand Ed., Earthquakes earthquakes earthquakaalong the easternThe engineering: seaboard, eastern hifted t States.in Beavers, Ann J. Arbor Science Publishers. Earthquake Engineering Institute and others Porceedings of conference September 14-16 Knoxville, TN, v.1, p.109-128. Wentworth, Carl M. and Marcia Mergner--Keefer,1983, Regenerate faults of small Cenozoic offset, probable earthquake sources in the southeastern United States. U.S. Geol. Survey, Prof. Paper 1313, Gregory S. Gohn, Ed. Yantis, 8. R. , J. K. Costain and Hans D. Ackermann,1983, A. reflection seismic study near Charleston, South Carolina. U.S. Geol. Survey, Prof. Paper 1313, Gregory S. Gohn, Ed. Zoback, Mary Lou and Mark Zoback,1980. State of Stress in the Contenninous United States. Jour. Geophys. Res., v. 85, p. 6113-6256.
, 2
- a ..
~
4 RS-RES-84-128 Page 12 F.2 Place of Delivery The items to be furnished hereunder shall be delivered all transportation cha'rges paid by the Contractor as specified in Section C.4 hereof. i F.3 Period of Perfomance 4 The performance of work described in Section C hereof shall commence as of the effective date of this contract and shall continue to completion thereof, estimated to occur within 24 months after said contract is effective. F.4 52.212-13 STOP-WORK ORDER. (APR1984) I (a) The Contracting Officer may, at any time, by written order to tne Contractor, require the Contractor to stop all, or any part, of the work called for by this contract for a period of 90 days after the order is delivered to the ' Contractor, and for any further period to which the parties may agrae. The order shall be specifically identified as a stop-work order issued under this clause. Upon receipt of the order, the Contractor shall immediately comply with 1 its tems and take all reasonable steps to minimize the incurrence of costs allocable to the work covered by the order during the period of work stoppage. - Within a period of 90 ' days after a stop-work order is delivered to the Contractor, or within any extension of that period to which the parties shall have agreed, the Contracting Officer shall either-- (1) Cancel the stop-work order; or (2) Terminate the work covered by the order as 'provided in the Default, or the Termination for Convenience of the Government, clause of this contract. (b) If a stop-work order issued under this clause is canceled or the period of the order or any extension thereof expires, the Contractor shall rer;me work. The Contracting Officer shall make an equitable adjustment in the delivery schedule or contract price, or both, and the contract shall be moo-fied, in writing, accordingly, if-- (1) The stop-work order results in an increase in the time required for, or in the Contractor's cost properly allocable to, the performance of any part , of this contract; and (2) The Contractor asserts a claim for the adjustment within 30 days after the end of the period of work stoppage; provided, that, if the Contracting ~ Officer decides the facts justify the action, the Contracting Officer may receiv'e and act upon the claim _ asserted at any time before final payment under this contract. (c) If a stop-work order is not canceled and the work covered by the order is terminated for the conveninece of the Government, the Contracting Officer shall allow reasonable costs resulting from the stop-work order in arriving at the termination settlement. (d) If a stop-work order is not canceled and the work covered by the order is terminated for default, the Contracting Officer shall allow, by equitable
; adjustment or otherwise, reasonable costs resulting from the stop-work order.
(End of clause) (AV 7-105.3 1971 APR) f e e----- ----twe,-,-*-s-wtw+,-.ww-- -r--w---%,----+,--m-w--- w---r-------+--*7-*=*e"----+ mum-'s-'- '"-r'--,v w -w---u--v-- v vww-rv w- ' - ww7 w--rw y-
RS-RES-84-128 Page 13 Section G - Contract Administration Data G.1 Accounting and Appropriation Data - B&R Number: FIN Number: G.2 Consideration and Payment (Incrementally Funded CPFF) A. Estimated Cost Fixed Fee and Obligation
- 1. It is estimated that the total cost to the Gover'nment for full performance of this contract will be.$ * , of which the sum of $
- represents the estimated reimbursable costs, and of which $
- represents the fixed fee.
- 2. Total funds currently available for payment and allotted to this contract are $ * , of which $
- represents the estimated
. reimbursable costs, and of which $
- represents the fixed fee.
- 3. It is estimated that the amount currently allotted will cover performance of Phase 1 which is scheduled to be completed
- months from the effective date of the contract.
B. Payment The Government shall render payment to the Contractor in s approximately thirty (30) days after submission of proper and correct invoices or vouchers. Additional provisions relating to payment are contained in Clause 52.232.22 of Part II, Section I hereto.
- To be incorporated into any resultant contract.
G.3 Overhead / General and Administrative Rates A. Pending the establishment of final overhead rates which shall be negotiated based on audit of actual costs, the Contractor shall be reimbursed for allowable indirect ~ costs hereunder at the provisional rate of
- percent of * .
B. Pending the establishment of final general and administrative rates which shall be negotiated based on audit of actual costs, the Contractor shall be ' reimbursed for allowable indirect costs hereunder at the provisional rate of
- percent of * .
C. Notwithstanding A. and S. of this Section, said
- provisional overhead and GaA. rates may be adjusted as appropriate during the term of the contract upon the acceptance of such revised rates by the Contracting Officer.
*To be incorporated into any resultant contract.
4
RS-RES-84-128 Page 14 G4 Payment of Fixed Fee At the time of 'each payment to the Contractor 'on account of allowable 4 cost, the Contractor shall be paid an amount.which is in the same ratio to the total fixed fee as the related payment being made on account of allowable cost is to the total estimated cost of performance of this contract; provided, however, that after payment of eighty-five percent (85%) of the total fixed fee, the provisions of paragraph (b) of the Clause 52.216-8 entitled Fixed Fee (April 1984) shall be followed. G.5 Technical Direction A. Performance of the work under this contract shall be subject to the technical direction of the NRC Project Officer named in Section G.6 of this contract. The term " Technical Direction" is defined to include the following:
- 1. Technical direction to the Contractor which shifts work emphasis between areas of work or tasks, requires pursuit of certain lines of inquiry, fills in details or otherwise serves to accomplish the contractual scope of work.
- 2. Providing assistance to the Contractor in the preparation of drawings, specifications or technical portions of the work description.
- 3. Review and where required by the contract, approval of technical reports, drawings, specifications and technical information to be delivered by the Contractor to the Government under the contract.
B. Technical direction must be within the general scope of work stated in the contract. The Project Officer does not have the authority to l and may not issue any technical direction which:
- 1. Constitutes an assignment of additional work outside the general l scope of the contract.
- 2. Constitutes a change as defined in the clause of Section I, Clause 52.243-2.
- 3. In any way causes an increase or decrease in the total estimated contract cost, the fixed fee, if any, or the time required for contract performance.
- 4. Changes any of the expressed terms, conditions or specifications of the contract.
I C. ALL TECHNICAL DIRECTIONS SHALL BE ISSUED IN WRITING BY THE PROJECT l OFFICER OR SHALL BE CONFIRMED BY SUCH PERSON IN WRITING WITHIN TEN (10) WORKING DAYS AFTER VERBAL ISSUANCE. A copy of said written direction shall be submitted to the Contracting Officer. l .
-, ,-,.,--,--_.-,-,,rn- -,--r ,,,,n-.--n.. , , - - - - - - - _ _ , , - - ,
RS-RES-84-128 Page 15 The Contractor shall proceed promptly with the performance of technical directions duly issued by the Project Officer in the manner prescribed by this article and within such person.'s authority under the provisions of this article. G.6 Project Officer A. The individual (s) listed in "B" below'is (are) hereby designated as the Contracting Officer's authorized representative (hereinafter called Project Officer) for technical aspects of this contract. The Project Officer is not authorized to approve or request any action which results in or could result in an increase in contract cost; or terminate, settle any claim or dispute arisingunder the contract, or issue any unilateral directive whatever. The Project Officer is responsible for: (1) monitoring the Contractor's technical progress, including surveillance and assessment of perfomance, and recommending to the Contracting
~
Officer changes in requirements; (2) interpreting the scope of work; (3) performing technical evaluation as required; (4) performing technical inspections and acceptances required by this contract; and (5) assisting the Contractor in the resolution of technical problems encountered during performance. Within the purview of this authority, the Project Officer is authorized to review all costs requested for reimbursement by Contractors and submit recommendations for approval, disapproval, or suspension for supplies / services required under the contract. The Contracting Officer is responsible for directing or negotiating any changes in tems, conditions, or amounts cited in the contract. For guidance from the Project Officer to the Contractor to be valid, it must: (1) be consistent with the description of work set forth in the contract; (2) not constitute new assignment of work or change to the expressed terms, conditions or specifications incorporated into this contract; (3) not constitute a basis for an extension to the period of performance or contract delivery schedule; and, as stated above, (4) not constitute a basis for any increase in the contract cost. B. Name and Mail' Code:
- Office Address:
- Telephone Number: *
*To be incorporated into any resultant contract.
G.7 Payment Due Date
RS-RES-84-128 Page 16 (a) Payments under this contract will be due 30 calendar days after the later of: (1) The date of actual receipt of a proper invoice (original and 4 copies) to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission, Division of Accounting and Finance, Office of Resource Management, ATTN: GOV /COM Accounts Section; Washington, D.C. 20555, or
.(2) The date the final deliverable product / service is accepted by the Government.
(b) For the purpose of deterinining the due date for payment and for no other purpose, acceptance will be deemed to occur 30 calendar days after the date of delivery of the final deliverable product / service performed in accordance with the terms of the contract. (c) If the final product / service is rejected for failure to conform to the technical requirements of the contract, the provisions in paragraph (b) of this clause will apply to the new delivery of the final product / service. (d) The date of payment by wire transfer through the Treasury Financial Communications System shall be considered the date payment is made for individual payments exceeding $25,000. The date a check is issued shall be considered the date payment is made for individual payments of $25,000 or less. G.8 Method of Payment (a) Payment under this contract will be made by wire transfer through the Treasury Financial Communications System for each individual payment in excess of $25,000 and by Treasury check for each individual payment of $25,000 or less. (b) Within seven days after the effective date of the contract, the Contractor shall forward the following information in writing to the Contracting Officer to facilitate wire transfer of contract i payments. In the event that the Contractor's financial institution j has access to the Federal Reserve Comunications System, Contractor shall complete all items except items 7 - 9. In the event the l Contractor's financial institution does not have access to the
- i. Federal Reserve Communications System, Contractor shall complete all items except item 4.
l 1. Name and address of organization. ! 2. Contact person and telephone number l ! 3. Name and address of financial institution l ,
- 4. Financial institutions's 9-digit ABA identifying number for routing transfer of funds
- 5. Telagraphic abbreviation of financial institution
- , . , - - ._____. . m . . _ _ - . _ - _ ~ , _ , - _ - - - . - . _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - - - . - - - -___ __
RS-RES-84-128 Page 17 -
- 6. Account number at your financial institution to be credited with the funds.
- 7. Name and address of- the correspondent financial institution your financial institution receives electronic funds transfer messages through, if it does not have access to the Federal Reserve Communications System
- 8. Correspondent financial institution 9-digit. ABA identifying number for routing transfer of funds
- 9. Telegraphic abbreviation of correspondent financial institution
- 10. Signature and title of person supplying this information (c) Any changes to the information furnished under paragraph (b) of this clause shall bc furnished to the Contracting Officer in writing. It is the Contractor's responsibility to furnish these changes promptly to avoid payments to erroneous bank accounts.
G.9 Invoice Requirements Invoices shall be submitted pursuant to Section J. Attachment *4 in an original and 4 copies to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Division of Accounting and Finance, Office of Resource Management, ATTN: - GOV /COM Accounts Section, Washington, D.C. 20555. To constitute a proper invoice, the invoice must include the following information and/or attached documentation: (1) Name of the business concern and invoice date. (2) Contract number or other authorization for delivery of property or services. (3) Description, price and quantity of property and services actually delivered or rendered. (4) Shipping and payment terms. (5) Name (where practicable), title, phone number, and complete mailing address of responsible official to whom payment is to be sent. (6) Billing Instructions for NRC Cos t-Type Contracts dated Februa ry
~
1982. G.10 Interest on Overdue Payments l (a) The Prompt Payment Act, Public Law 97-177 (96 STAT. 85, 31 USC 1801) ! is applicable to payment of the expiration invoice under this ! contract and requires the payment of interest to Contractors on overdue payments of the expiration invoice or improperly taken j discounts. i
9 RS-RES-84-128 Page 18 (b) Detenninations of in'terest- due will be made in accordance with the
. provisions of the Prompt Payment Act and Office of Management and Budget Circular. A-125, Vol. 47 Federal Register 37321, August 25, 1982. Among other considerations, OMB Circular A-125 provides that:
(1) Interest penalties are not required when payment is delayed because of a disagreement over the amount of payment or other issues concerning compliance with the terms of the contract. (2) Whenever.a proper invoice is paid after the due date plus 15 days, interest will be included with the payment at the interest rate applicable on the payment date. Interest will be computed from the day after the due date through the payment date. (c) For purposes of this clause., an expiration invoice is defined as a claim submitted for costs incurred for performance through the expiration date of a Cost Type contract. G.11 , Travel Reimbursement The Contractor will be reimbursed for the following reasonable domestic travel costs incurred directly and specifically in the performanu of i this contract and accepted by the Contracting Officer:
- 1. Per diem-shall be reimbursed at a daily rate not to exceed $50.00.
i The per diem amount is comprised of lodging expense plus $23.00 for meals and miscellaneous expense. ,. 2. When travel is to one of the high-rate geographical areas listed i below, actual subsistance costs shall be reimbursed at a daily rate not to exceed the rates indicated: Area Daily Rate l
- 3. The cost of travel by privately owned automobile shall be reimbursed at the rate of 20.54 per mile.
- 4. The cost of travel by rented automobile 'shall be reimbursed on a reasonable actual expense basis. ..
- 5. All common carrier travel reimbursable hereunder shall be via ;
economy class rates when available. If not available, reimbursement I l vouchers will be annotated that econony class accomodations were ! not available. First-class air travel is not authorized. l l 6. Receipts are required for common carrier transportation, lodging and j miscellaneous items in excess of $15.00.
- 7. The rates provided below shall remain in effect until such time as a unilateral contract modification is issued by the Contracting changes (increases or decreases) in the Federal Officer, Travel Regulations reflecting (FTR).
~
m._. ___,.._,.,._..__.-.-,._.___._._.4_.__.. .___,,._,__,._...._.,,__.-._m._____
RS-RES-84-128 Page 19
- . Section H - Special Contract Requirements ,
H.1 Key Personnel Pursuant to this Article (Key Personnel), the following individuals are considered to be essential to the successful performance of the work hereunder. (a) Certain skilled experienced professional and/or technical personnel are essential for successful Contractor accomplishment of the work to be performed under this contract. These are defined as " Key Personnel" and are those persons whose resumes were submitted for evaluation of the proposal. The Contractor agrees that such personnel shall not be removed from the contract work or replaced without compliance with paragraphs (b) and (c) hereof. f i-3, (b) If one or more of the key personnel for whatever reason becomes, or
- is expected to become, unavailable for work under this contract for a continuous period exceeding 30 work days, or is expected to devote substantially less effort to the work than indicated in the proposal or initially anticipated, the Contractor shall immediately notify the
, Contracting Officer and shall, subject to the concurrence of the ! Contracting Officer or his authorized representative, promptly replace ! such personnel with personnel of at least substantially equal ability i, and qualifications, i (c) All-requests' for approval of substitutions hereunder must be in writing and provide a detailed explanation of the circumstances necessitating the proposed substitutions. They must contain a complete resume for the proposed substitute, and other infonnation requested by !r the Contracting Officer or needed by him to approve or disapprove the
- i proposed substitution. The Contracting Officer or his authorized representative will evaluate such requests and promptly notify the
- l Contractor of his approval or disapproval thereof in writing.
(d) If the Contracting Officer determines that suitable and timely
- replacement of key personnel who have been reassigned, terminated or have otherwise become unavailable for the contract work is not it reasonably forthcoming or that the resultant reduction of productive
. effort would be so substantial as to impair the successful completion of the contract or the service order, the contract may be terminated by the Contracting. Officer for default or for the convenience of the Government, as appropriate, or, at the discretion of the Contracting Officer if he finds the Contractor at fault for the condition, the
- contract price or fixed fee may be equitably adjusted downward to compensate the Government for any resultant delay, loss or damage.
1 :
- H.2 Consultant or Other Comparable Employment Services of Contractor Employees The Contractor shall require all employees who are employed, full-time (an individual who performs work under the cost-type contract on a
RS-RES-84-128 Page 20 full-time annual basis) or part-time (50 percent or more of regular annual compensation received under terms of a contract with the Comission) on the contract work to disclose to the Contractor all consultant or other comparable employment services which the employees-proposed to undertake for others. The Contractor shall transmit to the Contracting Officer all information obtained from such disclosures. The Contractor will require any employee who will be employed full-time on the contract to agree, as a condition of his participation in such work, that he will not perform consultant or other comparable employment services for another Comission cost-type Contractor under its contract with the Comission except with the prior approval of the Contractor. H.3 Safety, Health, and Fire Protection The Contractor shall take all reasonable precautions in the performance of the work under this contract to protect the health and safety of employees and of members of the public and to minimize danger from all hazards to life and property and shall comply with all health, safety, and fire protection regulations and requirements (including reporting requirements) of the Comission and the Department of Labor. In the event that the Contractor fails to comply with said regulations or requi rements , the Contracting Officer may, without prejudice to any other legal or contractual rights of the Comission, issue an order stopping all or any part of the work; thereafter, a start order for resumption of work may be issued at the discretion of the Contracting Officer. The Contractor shall make no claim for an extension of time or for compensation or damages by reason of or in connection with such work stoppage. H4 Dissemination of Contract Information The Contractor shall not publish, pennit to be published, or disseminate to the public any information, oral or written, concerning the work performed under this contract without the prior written consent of the Contracting Officer. Two copies of any information proposed to be published or disseminated shall be submitted to the Contracting Officer. Failure to comply with this clause shall be grounds for termination of this contract. H.S Private Use of Contract Infonnation and Data Except as othemise specifically authorized by Section H.4, publication of contract work of this contract, or as othemise approved by the Contracting Officer, information and other data developed or acquired by or furnished the Contractor in the performance of this contract, shall be used only in connection with the work under this contract. H.6 Drawings, Designs, and Specifications All drawings, sketches, designs, design data, specifications, notebooks, technical and scientific data, and all photographs, negatives, reports, findings, recomendations , data and memoranda of every description relating thereto, as well as all copies of the foregoing relating to the work or any part thereto, shall be subject to inspection by the 4e e
RS-RES-84-128 Page 21 Commission at all reasonable times (for which inspection the proper facilities shall be afforded the Commission by the Contractor and its ubcontractors), shall be the property of the Government and may be used by the Government for any purpose whatsoever without any claim on the part of the Contractor and its subcontractors and vendors for additional compensation and shall, subject to the right of the Contractor to retain a copy of said material for its own use, be delivered to the Government, or otherwise disposed of by the Contractor either as the Contracting Officer may from time to time direct during the progress of the work or in any event as the Contracting Officer shall direct upon completion or termination of this contract. The Contractor's right of retention and use shall be subject to the security, patent, and use of information provisions, if any, of this contract. H.7 Proprietary Data and Confidential Information In connection with the performance of the work under this contract, the Contractor may )be furnished, or may develop or acquire, proprietary data.or con (trade secrets financial information, including Consiission plans, policies . reports, financial plans, internal data protected by the Privacy Act of 1974 (P.L. 93-579), or other information which has not been released to the public or has been determined by the Commission to be otherwise exempt from disclosure to the public. Contractor agrees to hold such information in confidence and not to directly or indirectly duplicate, ~ disseminate, or disclose such information in whole or in part to any other person or organization except as may be necessary to perfom the work under this contract. Contractor agrees to return such information to the Commission or otherwise dispose of it either as the Contracting Officer may from time to time direct during the progress of the work or in any event as the Contracting Officer shall direct upon completion or tennination of this contract. Failure to comply with this clause shall be grounds for termination of this contract. H.8 Security . (a) Contractor's duty to safeguard Restricted Data, Formerly Restricted Data, and other classified information. The Contractor shall, in accordance with the Commission's security regulations and requirements, be responsible for safeguarding Restricted Data, Formerly Restricted Data, and other classified information and protecting against sabotage, espionage, loss and theft, the classified documents and material in the Contractor's possession in connection with the performance of work under this contract. Except as otherwise expressly provided in this contract, the Contractor shall, upon completion or termination of this contract, transmit to the Comission any classified matter in the possession of the Contrator or any person under the Contractor's control in connection with performance of this contract. If retention by the Contractor of any classified matter is required after the completion or termination of the contract and such retention is approved by the Contracting Officer, the Contractor will complete a certificate of possession to be furnished to the Comission specifying the classified matter to be retained. The certification shall identify
RS-RES-84-128 Page 22 the items and types or categories of matter retained, the conditions governing the retention of the matter and their period of retention, if known. If the retention is approved by the Contracting' Officer, the security provisions of the contract will continue to be applicable to the matter retained. (b) Regulations. The Contractor agrees to conform to all security regulations and requirements of the Comission. (c) Definition of Restricted Data. The term " Restricted Data," as used in this clause, means all data concerning (1) design, manufacture, or utilization of atomic weapons; (2) the production of special nuclear material; or (3) the use of special nuclear material in the production of energy, but shall not include data declassified or removed from the Restricted Data category pursuant to section 142 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended. (d) Definition of Formerly Restricted Data. The term "Formerly Restricted Data," as used in this clause, means all data removed from the Restricted Data category under section 142-d. of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended. (e) Security Clearance Personnel. The Contractor shall not permit any individual to have access to Restricted Data, Formerly Restricted Data, or other classified information, except in accordance with the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, and the Commission's regulations or requirements applicable to the particular type or category of classified information to which access is required. (f) Criminal Liabilities. It is understood that disclosure of Restricted Data, Formerly Restricted Data, or other classified information relating to the work or services ordered hereunder to any person not entitled to receive it, or failure to safeguard any Restricted Data, Formerly Restricted Data, or any other classified matter that may come to the Contractor or any person under the Contractor's control in connection with work under this contract, may subject the Contractor, its agents, employees, or subcontractors to criminal liability under the laws of the United States. (See the Atomic I Energy Act of 1954, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 2011 et seq.; 18 U.S.C. 793 and 794; and Executive Order 11652.) i (g) Subcontracts and Purchase Orders. Except as otherwise authorized in writing by the Contracting Officer, the Contractor shall insert provisions similar to the ~ foregoing in all subcontracts and purchase orders under this contract. (h) In performing the contract work, the Contractor shall assign classifications to all documents, material, and equipment originated or generated by the Contractor in accordance with classification guidance by the Commission. Every subcontract and purchase order issued hereunder involving the origination or generation of classified documents, material, or equipment shall provide that the subcontractor or supplier shall assign classifications to all such documents,
~
- m. ..
RS-RES-84-128 Page 23 material, and equipmer.t. in accordance with classification guidance.
- furnished by the Contractor. ,
l H.9 Contractor Organizational Conflicts of Interest (a) Purpose. The primary purpose of this clause is to aid in ensuring that the Contractor: (1) Is not placed on a conflicting role because of . current or. planned interest (financial, contractual, organizational, or othemise) which relate to the work under this contract, and (2) does not obtain an unfair competitive advantage over other parties by virtue - of its performance of this contract. (b) Scope. The restrictions described herein shall apply to performance or participation by the Contractor as defined in 41 CFR ~ 920-1.5402(f) in the activities covered by this clause. (c) Work for Others. Notwithstanding any other provision of this contract, during the term of this contract, the Contractor agrees to 3 forgo entering into consulting or other contractual arrangements with
- any firm or organization, the resul t of which may give rise to a conflict of interest with respect to the work being performed under this contract. The Contractor shall ensure that all employees who are '
employed full time under this contract and employees designated as key personnel, if any, under this contract abide by the provision of this ! 1 clause. If the Contractor believes with respect to itself or any such , , employee that any proposed consultant or other contractual arrangement with any firm or organization may involve a potential conflict of interest. the Contractor shall obtain the. written approval of the : Contracting Officer prior to execution of such contractual arrangement. a (d) Disclosure after award. !L (1) The Contractor warrants that to the best of its knowledge and belief and except as othemise set forth in this contract, it does not have any (organizational conflicts of interest, as defined in 41 CFR20-1.5402a).
- 3. (2) The Contractor agrees that if after award it discovers organizational conflicts of interest with respect to this contract, it shall make an immediate and full disclosure in writing to the i Contracting Officer. This statement shall include a description of '
i the action which the Contractor has taken or proposes to take to avoid or mitigate such conflicts. The NRC may, however, terminate - the contract for convenience if it deems such termination to be in
- the best interests of the Government.
(e)Accesstoanduseofinformation. ! (1) If the Contractor in the performance of this contract obtains access to information, such as NRC plans, policies, reports, i studies, financial plans, internal data protected by the Privacy Act of 1974 (Pub. L. 93-579), or data which has not been released to the public, the Contractor agrees not to: 4
RS-RES-84-128 Page 24 4 (1). Use such information for any private purpose I
-- . until the information has been released to the public; (ii) compete for work for the Commission based on such
.infonnation for a period of six (6) months after either the completion of this contract or the t release of such information to the public, whichever is first; (iii) submit an unsolicited proposal to the Government based on such infonnation until one year after
- the release of such information to the public, or (iv) release the information without prior written approval by the Contracting Officer unless such
'information has previously been released to the public by the NRC.
(2) In addition, the Contractor agrees that to the extent it ! i . receives ~ or is given access to proprietary data, data protected by the Privacy Act of 1974 (Pub. L. 93-579), or other ccafidential or ! privileged technical, business, or financial information under this . contract, the Contractor shall treat such information in accordance with restrictions placed on use of the information. i (3) The Contractor shall have, subject to patent and security ; provisions of this contract, the right to use technical data it ! produces under this contract for private purposes provided that all
- requirements of this contract have been met. ,
(f) Subcontracts. Except as provided in 41 CFR 20-1.5402(h), the Contractor shall include this clause, including this paragraph, in
- subcontracts of any tier. The terms '" contract " " Contractor," and '
. " Contracting Officer " shall be appropriately modified to preserve ! the Government's rights. ! (g) Remedies. For breach of any of the above prescriptions or for intentional nondisclosure or misrepresentation . of any relevant interest required to be disclosed concerning this
; contract or for such erroneous representations as necessarily imply
! bad faith, the Government may terminate the contract for default, ! I disqualify the Contractor from subsequent contractual efforts, and , pursue other remedies as may be permitted by law or this contract. ! i. (h) Waiver. A request for waiver under this clause shall be directed in writing through the Contracting Officer to the Executive Director for Operations (EDO) in accordance with the procedures ! , - outlined in 120-1.5411. . (1) Follow-On Effort. The Contractor shall be ineligible to l participate in NRC contracts, subcontracts, or proposals therefor , (solicited or unsolicited) which stem directly from the Contractor's i performance of work under this contract. Furthermore, unless so l
*w . ,
-. r ,~, - -- -, , . . - - - . , _ , - - . , _ . ,,_ ,,n.,,,-. . . , _ _ _ _ _ , , , ,n._.__,___,g _
RS-RES-84-128 Page 25 directed in writing by the Contracting Officer, the Contractor shall not perform any technical consulting or management support services work or evaluation activities under this contract on any of its products or services or the products or services of another fim if the Contractor has been substantially involved in the development or marketing of such products or services. If the Contractor under this contract prepares a complete or essentially complete statement of work or specifications, the Contractor shall be ineligible to perform or participate in the initial contractual effort which is based on such statement of work or specifications. The Contractor shall not incorporate its products or services in such statement of work or specifications unless so directed in writing by the Contracting Officer, in which case the restriction in this subparagraph shall not apply. Nothing in this paragraph shall preclude the Contractor form offering or selling its standard commercial items to the Government. H.10 CONTRACTOR ORGANIZATIONAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST I represent to the best of my knowledge and belief that: The award to of a contract or the modification of an existing contract does / / or does not / / involve situations or relationships of the type set forth in Attachment 2, paragraph 20-1.5403(b). If the representation as completed indicates that situations or relationships of the type set forth in Attachment 2 are involved or the Contracting Officer otherwise determines that potential organizational conflicts exist, the offeror shall provide a statement in writing which describes in a concise manner all relevant factors bearing on his ' representation to the Contracting Officer. If the Contracting Officer determines that organizational conflicts exist, the following actions may be taken: (a) impose appropriate conditions which avoid such conflicts. (b) disqualify the offeror, or (c) determine that it is otherwise in the best interest of the United States to seek award of the contract under the waiver provisions of 5 20-1.5411. The refusal to provide the representation required by $20-1.5404(b) or upon request of the Contracting Officer the facts required by 920-1.5404(c), shall result in disqualification of the offeror for award. The nondisclosure or misrepresentation of any relevant interest may also result in the disqualification of the offeror for awards; or if such nondisclosure for misrepresentation is discovered after award, the resulting contract may be terminated. The offeror may also be disqualified from subsequent related NRC contracts and be subject to such other remedial actions provided by law or the resulting contract.
RS-RES-84-128 Page 26 PART II - CONTRACT CLAUSES Section I - Contract Clauses 52.202-1 DEFINITIONS. (APR1984) (a) " Head of the agency" (also c'alled " agency head") or " Secretary" means the Secretary (or Attorney General, Administrator, Governor, Chairperson, or other chief official, as appropriate) of the agency, including any deputy or assistant chief official of the agency, and, in the Department of Defense, the Under Secretary and any Assistant Secretary of the Departments of the Army, Navy, and Air Force and the Director and Deputy Director of Defense agencies; and the term " authorized representative" means any person, persons, or board (other than the Contracting Officer) authorized to act for the head of the agency)or (b Secretary." Contracting Officer" means a person with the authority to enter into, administer, and/or terminate contracts and make related determinations and findings. The term includes certain authorized representatives of the Contracting Officer acting within the limits of their authority as delegated by the Contracting Officer. (c) Except as otherwise provided in this contract, the term " subcontracts" includes, but is not limited to, purchase orders and changes and modifications to purchase orders under this contract. (End of clause) (R 7-103.1 1979 MAR) (R7-203.1) (R7-302.1) (R 7-402.1 (R 7-901.1 , R 7-1902.1 R 7-1909.1 52.203-1 0FFICIALS NOT TO BENEFIT. (APR 1984) No member of or delegate to Congress 'or resident commissioner, shall be admitted to any share or part of this contract, or to any benefit arising from it. However, this clause does not apply to this contract to the extent that this contract is made with a corporation for the corporation's general benefit. (End of clause) (R 7-103.19 1949 JUL) (R 1-7.102-17) 52.203-3 GRATUITIES. (APR1984) (a) The right of the Contractor to proceed may be terminated by written notice if, after notice and hearing, the agency head or a designee determines that the Contractor, its agent, or another representative-- (1) Offered or gave a gratuity (e.g., an entertainment or gift) to an officer, official, or employee of the Government; and (2) Intended, by the gratuity, to obtain a contract or favorable treatment under a contract. (b) The facts supporting this determination may be reviewed by any court having lawful jurisdiction.
. RS-RES-84-128 Page 27 (c) If this contract is terminated under paragraph (a)'above, the Government is entitled--
(1) To pursue the same remedies as in a breach of the contract; and (2) In addition to any other damages provided by law, to exemplary damages of not less than 3 nor more than 10 times the cost incurred by the Contractor in giving gratuities to the person concerned, as detennined by the agency head or a designee. (This subparagraph (c)(2) is applicable only if this contract uses money appropriated to the Department of Defense.) (d) The rights and remedies of the Government provided in this clause shall not be exclusive and are in addition to any other rights and remedies provided by law or under this contract. (End of clause) (R 7-104.16 1952 MAR) 52.203-5 COVENANT AGAINST CONTINGENT FEES. (APR1984) (a) The Contractor warrants that no person or agency has been employed or retained to solicit or obtain this contract upon an agreement or understanding for a contingent fee, except a bona fide employee or agency. For breach or violation of this warranty, the Government shall have the right to annul this contract without liability or, in its discretion, to deduct from the contract price or consideration, or otherwise recover, the full amount of the contingent fee. (b) "8cna fide a'gency ," as used in this clause, means an established consercial or selling agency, maintained by a contractor for the purpose of securing business, that neitner exerts nor proposes to exert improper influence to solicit or obtain Government contracts nor holds itself out as being able to obtain any Government contract or contracts through improper influence.
" Bona fide employee," as used in this clause, means a person, employed by a contractor and subject to the contractor's supervision and control as to time, place, and manner of perfonnance, who neither exerts nor proposes to exert
- improper influence to solicit or obtain Government contracts nor holds out as being able to obtain any Government contract or contracts through improper influence.
" Contingent fee," as used-in this clause, means any connission, percentage, brokerage, or other fee that is contingent upon the success that a person or concern has in securing a Government contract.
" Improper influence," as used in this clause, means any influence that induces or tends to induce a Government employee or officer to give consideration or to act regarding a Government contract on any basis other than the merits of the matter.
(End of clause) (R7-103.201958JAN) R 1-1.503) (R1-7.102-18) 52.215-1 EXAMINATION OF RECORDS BY COMPTROLLER GENERAL. (APR 1984) (a) This clause applies if this contract exceeds $10,000 and was entered into by negotiation. (b) The Comptroller General of the United States or a duly authorized representative from the General Accounting Office shall, until 3 years after final payment under this contract or for any shorter period specified in Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Subpart 4.7, Contractor Records Retention, have
RS-RES-84-128 Page 28 access to and the right to examine any of the Contractor's directly pertinent books, documents, papers, or other records involving transactions rt: lated to this contract. (c) The Contractor agrees to include in first-tier subcontracts under this contract a clause to the effect that the Comptroller General or a duly authorized representative from the General Accounting Office shall, until 3 years after final payment under the subcontract or for any shorter period specified in FAR Subpart 4.7, have access to and the right to examine any of the subcontractor's directly pertinent books, documents, papers, or other records involving transactions related to the subcontract. " Subcontract," as used in this clause, excludes (1) purchase orders not exceeding $10,000 and (2) subcontracts or purchase orders for public utility services at rates established to apply unifonnly to the public, plus any applicable reasonable connection charge. (d) The periods of access and examination in paragraphs (b) and (c) above for records relating to (1) appeals under the Disputes clause (2) litigation or settlement of claims arising from the performance of this contract, or (3) costs and expenses of this contract to which the Comptroller General or a duly authorized representative from the General Accounting Office has taken exception sh911 continue until such appeals, litigation, claims, or exceptions are d4 posed of. (End of clause) (R 7-104.15 1975 JUN) (R1-7.103-3) 52.215-2 AUDIT--NEGOTIATION. (APR1984) (a)Examinationofcosts. If this is a cost-reimbursement, incentive, time-and-materials, labor-hour, or price-redeterminable contract, or any combination of these, the Contractor shall maintain--and the Contracting Officer or representatives of the Contracting Officer shall have the right to examine and audit--books, records, documents, and other evidence and accounting procedures and practices, sufficient to reflect properly all costs claimed to have been incurred or anticipated to be incurred in performing this contract. This right of examination shall include inspection at all reasonable times of the Contractor's plants, or parts of them, engaged in performing the contract. (b) Cost or pricing data. If, pursuant to law, the Contractor has been required to submit cost or pricing data in connection with pricing this contract or any modification to this contract, the Contracting Officer or representatives of the Contracting Officer who are employees of the Government shall have the right to examine and audit all books, records, documents, and other data of the Contractor (including computations and projections) related to negotiating. pricing, or performing the contract or modification, in order to evaluate the accuracy, completeness, and currency of the cost or pricing data. The right of examination shall extend to all documents necessary to pennit adequate evaluation of the cost or pricing data submitted, along with the computations and projections used. (c) Reports. If the Contractor is required to furnish cost, funding, or performance reports, the Contracting Officer or representatives of the Contracting Officer who are employees of the Government shall have the right to examine and audit books, records, other documents, and supporting materials, for the purpose of evaluating (1) the effectiveness of .the Contractor's policies and procedures to produce data compatible with the objectives of these reports and (2) the data reported.
- . RS-RES-84-128 Page 29 (d) Availability. The Contractor shall make available at its office at all reasonable times the materials described in paragraphs (a) and (b) above, for examination, audit, or reproduction, until 3 years after final payment under this contract, or for any shorter period specified in Subpart 4.7, Contractor Records Retention, of the Federal Acquisition Regulation, or for any longer period required by statute or by other clauses of this contract. In addition--
(1) If this contract is completely or partially terminated, the records relating to the work terminated shall be made available for 3 years after any resulting final termination settlement; and (2) Records relating to appeals under the Disputes clause or to litigation or the settlement of claims arising under or relating to this contract shall be made available until such appeals, litigation, or claims are disposed of. (e) The Contractor shall insert a clause containing all the terms of this clause, including this paragraph (e), in all subcontracts over $10,000 under this contract, altering the clause only as necessary to identify properly the contracting parties and the Contracting Officer under the Government prime contract. (End of clause)
,(R7-104.41(a)1978AUG)
(R1-3.814-2(a)) R 7-303.28 R 7-402.30 R 7-603.20 R 7-605.11 R 7-607.22 (R 7-802.7 (R7-901.16 (R 7-1702.15 1971 APR) R 7-1903.29 R 7-1909.24 R 7-2102.19 52.215-22 PRICE REDUCTION FOR DEFECTIVE COST OR PRICING DATA. (APR 1984) (a) If any price, including profit' or fee, negotiated in connection with this contract, or any cost reimbursable under this contract, was increased by any significant amount because (1) the Contractor or a subcontractor furnished cost or pricing data that were not complete, accurate, and current as certified in its Certificate of Current Cost or Pricing Data, (2) a subcontractor or prospective subcontractor furnished the Contractor cost or pricing data that were not complete, accurate, and current as certified in the Contractor's Certificate of Current Cost or Pricing Data, or (3) any of these parties furnished data of any description that were not accurate, the price or cost shall be reduced accordingly and the contract shall be modified to reflect the reduction. (b) Any reduction in the contract price under paragraph (a) above due to defective data from a prospective subcontractor that was not subsequently awarded the subcontract shall be limited to the amount, plus applicable overhead and profit markup, by which (1) the actual subcontract or (2) the actual cost to the Contractor, if there was no subcontract, was less than the prospective subcontract cost estimate submitted by the Contractor; provided, that the actual subcontract price was not itself affected by defective cost or pricing data.
RS-RES-84-128 Page 30 (End of clause) (R 7-104.29(a) 1970 JAN) (R1-3.814-1(a)) 52.215-24 SUBCONTRACTOR COST OR PRICING DATA. (APR1984) (a) Before awarding any subcontract expected to exceed $500.000 when entered into, or before pricing any subcontract modification involving a pricing adjustment expected to exceed $500,000, the Contractor shall require the subcontractor to submit cost or pricing data (actually or by specific identification in writing), unless the price is-- (1) Based on adequate price competition; (2) Based on established catalog or market prices of commercial items sold in substantial quantities to the general public; or (3) Set by law or regulation. (b) The Contractor shall require the subcontractor to certify in substantially the form prescribed in Subsection 15.804-4 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) that, to the best of its knowledge and belief, the data submitted under paragraph (a) above were accurate, complete, and current as of the date of agreement on the negotiated price of the subcontract or subcontract modification. . (c) In each subcontract that exceeds $500,000 when entered into, the Contractor shall insert either-- (1) The substance of this clause, including this paragraph (c), if paragraph (a) above requires submission of cost or pricing data for the subcontract; or (2) The substance of the clause at FAR 52.215-25, Subcontractor Cost or Pricing Data--Modifications. (End of clause) (R 7-104.42(a) 1970 JAN) (R1-3.814-3(a)) 52.215-30 FACILITIES CAPITAL COST OF MONEY. (APR1984) (a) Facilities capital cost of money will be an allowable cost under the contemplated contract, but only if the prospective contractor elects to claim it below. If the prospective contractor elects .to claim this cost, the Waiver of Facilities Capital Cost of Money will be excluded from the contract. If the prospective contractor does not elect to claim this cost, the contract will include the Waiver of Facilities Capital Cost of Money. (b) By including an item of proposed allowable cost in response to the solicitation, the prospective contractor will be deemed to have elected to claim facilities capital cost of money. (End of clause) (NM) 52.215-31 WAIVER OF FACILITIES CAPITAL COST OF MONEY. (APR1984) If the Contractor did not include facilities capital cost of money as a proposed allowable cost, it shall be deemend that the Contractor waived the right to claim it under this contract. (End of clause) (AV 0FPP Policy Letter 80-7 1980 OCT) e e
RS-RES-84-128 Page 31 1 52.216-7 ALLOWABLE COST AND PAYMENT. (APR 1984)
. (a) Invoicing. The Government shall make payments to the Contractor when requested as work progresses, but (except for small business concerns) not more often than once every 2 weeks in amounts determined to be allowable by the Contracting FAR)
Regulation (Officer in accordance in effect on the datewithofSubpart this contract 31.2 ofand thethe Federal termsAcquisition of this contract. The Contractor may submit to an authorized representative of the Contracting Officer, in such form and reasonable detail as the representative may require, an invoice or voucher supported by a statement of the claimed this contract. allowable cost for performing (b) Reimbursing costs. (1) For the purpose of reimbursing allowable costs (except as provided in subparagraph (2) below, with respect to pension, deferred profit sharing, and employee stock ownership plan contributions), the term
" costs" includes only-- -
(1) Those recorded costs that, at the time of the request for reimbursement, the Contractor has paid by cash, check, or other fonn of actual payment for items or services purchased directly for the contract; (ii) When the Contractor is not delinquent in paying costs of l contract performance in the ordinary course of business, costs incurred, but not necessarily paid, for-- (A) Materials issued from the Contractor's inventory and placed in the production process for use on the contract; Direct labor; Direct travel; Other direct in-house costs; and Properly allocable and allowable indirect costs, as shown in the records maintained by the Contractor for purposes of obtsining reimbursement under Government contracts; and (iii) The amount of progress payments that have been paid to the Contractor's subcontractors under similar cost standards. (2) Contractor contributions to any pension, profit-sharing, or employee stuck ownership plan funds that are paid d3ndu'Ifdn c pgtih[0fu88@fdi8"f80$$$ gg, gryffgggppggp gp]ug after the close of the period covered. Payments made 30 days or more after the close of a period shall not be included until the Contractor actually makes the payment. Accrued costs for such contributions that are paid less often than quarterly shall be excluded from indirect costs for payment purposes until the Contractor actually makes the payment. (3) Nctwithstanding the audit and adjustment of invoices or vouchers under paragraph (g) below, allowable indirect costs under this contract shall be obtained b applying indirect cost rates established in accordance with paragraph (y)d below. (4) Any statements in specifications or other documents incorporated in this contract by reference designating performance of services or furnishing of materials at the Contractor's expense or at no cost to the Government shall be disregarded for purposes of cost-reimbursement under this clause. (c) Small business concerns. A small business concern may be paid more often than every 2 weeks and may invoice and be paid for recorded costs for items or services purchased directly for the contract, even though the concern has not yet paid for those items or services. (d) Final indirect cost rates. (1) Final annual indirect cost rates and the appropriate bases shall be established in accordance with Subpart 42.7 of the
RS-RES-84-128 Page 32-Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) in effect for the period covered by the indirect cost rate proposal. (2) The Contractor shall, within 90 days after the expiration of each of its fiscal years, or by a later date approved by the Contracting Officer, submit to the cognizant Contracting Officer responsible for negotiating its final indirect cost rates and, if required by agency procedures, to the cognizant audit activity proposed final indirect cost rates for that period and supporting cost data specifying the contract and/or subcontract to which the rates apply. The proposed rates shall be based on the Contractor's actual cost experience for that period. The appropriate Government representative and Contractor shall establish the final indirect cost rates as promptly as practical after receipt of the Contractor's proposal. (3) The Contractor and the appropriate Government representative shall execute a written understanding The understanding shall specify (setting forth the final indirect cost rates.1) the agreed rates, (ii) the bases to which the rates apply, (iii) the periods for which the s l rates the apply, (iv)and settlement, any(v)pecific the affected indirect cost items contract and/ortreated as direct subcontract, identifying costs in l any with advance agreements or special terms and the applicable rates. The understanding shall not change any monetary ceiling, contract obligation, or specific cost allowance or ditallowance provided for in this contract. The understanding is incorporated into this contract upon execution. (4) Failure by the parties to agree on a final annual indirect cost rate shall be a dispute within the meaning of the Disputes clause. (e) Billing rates. Until final annual indirect cost rates are established
- for any period, the Government shall reimburse the Contractor at billing rates established by the Contracting Officer or by an authorized representative (the cognizant auditor), subject to adjustment when the final rates are established.
These billing rates-- (1) Shall be the anticipated final rates; and )' (2) May be prospectively or retroactively revised by mutual agreement, at either party's request, to prevent substantial overpayment or underpayment. (f) Quick-closecut procedures. When the Contractor and Contracting Officer agree, the quick-closeout procedures of Subpart 42.7 of the FAR may be used. (g) Audit. At any time or times before final payment, the Contracting
. Officer may have the Contractor's invoices or vouchers and statements of cost audited. Any payment may be (1) reduced by amounts found by the Contracting Officer not to constitute allowable costs or (2) adjusted for prior overpayments or underpayments.
(h) Final payment. (1) The Contractor shall submit a completion invoice or voucher, designated as such, promptly upon completion of the work, but no later than one year (or longer, as the Contracting Officer may approve in writing) from the completion date. Upon approval of that invoice or voucher, and upon ! the Contractor's compliance with all terms of this contract, the Government shall promptly pay any balance of allowable costs and that part of the fee (if any) not previously paid. (2) The Contractor shall pay to the Government any refunds, rebates, credits, or other amounts (including interest, if any) accruing to or received by the Contractor or any assignee under this contract, to the extent that those ' amounts are properly allocable to costs for which the Contractor has been reimbursed by the Government. Reasonable expenses incurred by the Contractor for securing refunds, rebates, credits, or other amounts shall be allowable costs if approved by the Contracting Officer. Before final payment under this
- i
.' l
RS-RES-84-128 Page 33 contract, the Contractor and each assignee whose assignment is in effect at the time of final payment shall Execute and deliver--
.(i) An assignment to the Government, in form and substance satisfactory to the Contracting 4fficer, of refunds, rebates, credits, or other amounts (including interest, if any) properly allocable to costs for which the Contractor has been reimbursed by the Government under this contract; and (ii) A release discharging the Government, its officers, agents, and employees from all liabilities, obligations, and claims arising out of or under this contract, except--
(A) Specified claims stated in exact amounts, or in estimated amounts when the exact amounts are not known; (B) Claims (including reasonable incidental expenses) based upon liabilities of the Contractor to third parties arising out of the performance of this contract; provided, that the claims are not known to the Contractor on the date of the execution of the release, and that the Contractor gives notice of the claims in writing to the Contracting Officer within 6 years following the release date or notice of final payment date, whichever is earlier; and (C) Claims for reimbursement of costs, including reasonable incidental expenses, incurred by the Contractor under the patent clauses of this contract, excluding, however, any expenses arising from the Contractor's indemnification of the Government against patent liability. (End of clause) (R7-203.4(a)1978SEP) (R 7-203.4(b) 1979 MAR) (R7-203.4(c)(4)(iv)) (R 7-402.3(a) and (c)(5)(iii) (R 7-605.5) R 7-1909.4) R 1-7.202-4) R 1-7.203-9) (R 1-3.704-1 and -2) (R1-7.402-3(a)and(b)(1)and(3)) (R 1-7.403-9) 52.216-8 FIXED FEE. (APR 1984) (a) The Government shall pay the Contractor for performing this contract the fixed fee specified in the Schedule. (b) Payment of the fixed fee shall be made as specified in the Schedule; provided, that af ter payment of 85 percent of the fixed fee, the Contracting Officer may withhold further payment of fee until a reserve is set aside in an amount that the Contracting Officer considers necessary to protect the Government's interest. This reserve shall not exceed 15 percent of the total fixed fee or $100,000, whichever is less. (Endofclause) (R 7-203.4(a) 1978 SEP) (R 7-203.4(c)(9) (R 7-402.3(a) and (c))(7)) (R 7-1909.4) (R 1-7.202-4) (R 1-7.402-3(a) and (b)(5))
RS-RES-84-128 Page 34 52.217-9 OPTION TO EXTEND THE TERM OF THE CONTRACT--SERVICES. (APR 1984) (a) The Government may bxtend the term of this contract by written notice to the Contractor within the time specified in the Schedule; provided, that the Government shall give the Contractor a preliminary written notice of its intent to extend at least 60 days before the contract expires. The preliminary notice does not commit the Government to an extension. (b) If the Government exercises this option, the extended contract shall be considered to include this option provision. (c) The total duration of this contract, including the exercise of any options under this clause, shall not exceed 36 (months). (Endofclause (R 7-104.27 c R 1-1.1508-2 d 52.219-13 UTILIZATION OF WOMEN-0WNED SMALL BUSINESSES, (APR1984) (a) " Women-owned small businesses " as used in this clause, means businesses that are at least 51 percent owned by women who are United States citizens and who also control and operate the business.
" Control," as used in this clause, means exercising the power to make policy decisions.
" Operate," as used in this clause, means being actively involved in the day-to-day management of the business.
(b) It is the policy of the United States that vomen-owned small businesses shall have the maximum practicable opportunity to participate in performing contracts awarded by any Federal agency. (c) The Contractor agrees to use its best efforts to give women-owned small businesses the maximum practicable opportunity to participate in the subcontracts it awards to the fullest extent consistent with the efficient performance of its contract. (Endofclause) (7-104.52 1980 AUG) (FPR Temp. Reg. 54 1980 MAY) 52.220-1 PREFERENCE FOR LABOR SURPLUS AREA CONCERNS. (APR1984) (a) This acquisition is not a set aside for labor surplus area (LSA) concerns. However, the offeror's status as such a concern may affect (1) entitlement to award in case of tie offers or (2) offer evaluation in accordance with the Buy American Act clause of this solicitation. In order to determine whether the offeror is entitled to a preference under (1) or (2) above, the offeror must identify, below, the LSA in which the costs to be incurred on account of manufacturing or production (by the offeror or the first- tier subcontractors) amount to more than 50 percent of the contract price. (b) Failure to identify the locations as specified above will preclude consideration of the offeror as an LSA concern. If the offeror is awarded a contract as an LSA concern and would not have otherwise qualified for award, the
RS-RES-84-128 Page 35 offeror shall perform the contract or cause the contract to be performed in accordance with the obligations of an LSA concern. (End of clause) (R 7-2003.13 1978 JUN) 52.220-3 UTILIZATION OF LA8OR SURPLUS AREA CONCERNS. (APR1984) (a) Applicability. This clause is applicable if this contract exceeds the appropriate small purchase limitation in Part 13 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation. (b) Policy. It. is the policy of the Government to award contracts to concerns that agree to perform substantially in labor surplus areas (LSA's) when this can be done consistent with the efficient performance of the contract and at prices no higher than are obtainable elsewhere. The Contractor agrees to use its best efforts to place subcontracts in accordance with this policy. (c) Order of preference. In complying with paragraph (b) above and with paragraph (c) of the c;ause of this contract entitled Utilization of Small Business Concerns and Small Disadvantaged Business Concerns, the Contractor shall observe the following order of preference in awarding subcontracts: (1) small business concerns that are LSA concerns, (2) other small business concerns, and (3) other LSA concerns. (d) Definitions. " Labor surplus area," as used in this clause, means a geographical area identified by the Department of Labor in accordance with 20 CFR 654, Subpart A, as an area of concentrated unemployment or underemployment or an area of labor surplus.
" Labor surplus area concern " as used in this clause, means a concern that together with its first-tier subcontractors will perform substantially in labor surplus areas. Performance is substantially in labor surplus areas if the costs incurred under the contract on account of manufacturing, production, or performance of appropriate services in labor surplus areas exceed 50 percent of the contract price.
, (R 1-1.805-3(a) (R 7-104.20(a) 1981 May) 52.222-1 NOTICE TO THE GOVERNMENT OF LABOR DISPUTES. (APR1984) (a) If the Contractor has knowledge that any actual or potential labor dispute is delaying or threatens to delay the timely performance of this contract, the Contractor shall immediately give notice, including all relevant information, to the Contracting Officer. (b) The Contractor agrees to insert the substance of this clause, including this paragraph (b), in any subcontract to which a labor dispute may delay the timely performance 'of this contract; except that each subcontract shall provide that in the event its timely performance is delayed or threatened by delay by any actual or potential labor dispute, the subcontractor shall immediately notify the next higher tier subcontractor or the prime Contractor, as the case may be, of all relevant information (Endconcerning)the of clause dispute. ' R 7-203.27 1967 JUN AV 7-104.4 1958 SEP , AV 7-603.1 1958 SEP
RS-RES-84-128 Page 36 52.222-2 PAYMENT FOR OVERTIME PREMIUMS. (APR 1984) l (a) 'The use of overtime is authorized under this contract if the overtime premium cost does not e x c ee d * . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . In addition to this dollar l ceiling,(overtime is permitted only for work--1) Necessary to cope with emergencies su accidents, natural disasters, breakdowns of production equipment, or occasional production bottlenecks of a sporadic nature; (2) By indirect-labor employees such as those perfoming duties in connection with administration, protection, transportation, maintenance, standby j plant protection, operation of utilities, or accounting; l (3) To perform tests, industrial processes, laboratory procedures. l loading or unloading of transportation conveyances, and operations in flight or l afloat that are continuous in nature and cannot reasonably be interrupted or completed otherwise; or
- 4) That will result in lower overall costs to the Government.
(b) (Any request for estimated overtime premiums that exceeds the amount l specified above shall include all estimated overtime for contract completion and l shall-- l (1) Identify the work unit; e.g., department or section in which the l requested overti.me will be used, together with present workload, staffing, and l other data of toe affected unit sufficient to permit the Contracting Officer to i evaluate the necessity for the overtime; (2) Demonstrate the effect that denial of the request will have on the contract delivery or performance schedule; (3) Identify the extent to which approval of overtime would affect the perfomance or payments in connection with other Government contracts, together with identification of each affected contract; and (4) Provide reasons why the required work cannot be performed by using I multishift operations or by employing additional personnel, - i !
- Insert either "zero" or the dollar amount agreed to during negotiations.
(End of clause) l (R7-203.271967JUN) l 52.222-3 CONVICT LA80R. (APR1984) ; i ! The Contractor agrees not to employ any person undergoing sentence of l Imprisonment in perfoming this contract except as provided by 18 U.S.C. l 4082(c)(2) and Executive Order 11755, December 29, 1973. , l (Endofclause) (R 7-104.17 1975 OCT) (R 7-607.12 1975 OCT) (R 1-12.204) l l 52.222-4 CONTRACT WORK HOURS AND SAFETY STANDARDS ACT--0VERTIME j COMPENSATION--GENERAL. (APR 1984) This contract, to the extent that it is of a character specified in the Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act (40 U.S.C. 327-333) (the Act), is subject to the following terms and all other applicable provisions and , exceptions of the Act and the regulations of the Secretary of Labor. 1 (a) Overtime requirements. Contractor or subcontractor shall not require or pemit any laborer or mechanic to work in excess of 8 hours in any calendar day, 1 (
- . _ _ _ _ . - _ . . _ _ . . - , , , . _ _ _ _ , _ , . , , , r-,,_, , . _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ , _m, . . . _ . . . _ _ , _ , _ - . , , , . _ , , , , . _ , - - . . - . . . . _ _ . _ . . _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ , _ _ ,
RS-RES-84-128 Page 37 or 40 hours in any workweek, on any part of the contract work subject to the Act; unless, the laborer or mechanic receives compensation at a rate not less than 11/2 times the basic rate of pay for all hours worked in excess of 8 hours in any calendar day, or 40 hours in any workweek, whichever produces the greater amount of overtime. (b) Violation, liability for unpaid wages, and liquidated damages. If the terms of paragraph (a) above are violated, the Contractor and any subcontractor responsible for the violation shall be liable to any affected employee for unpaid wages. In addition, the Contractor and subcontractor shall be liable to the United States for liquidated damages. These damages are computed for each individual laborer or mechanic at $10 for each calendar day on which the employee was required or permitted to be employed in violation of paragraph (a) above. (c) Withholding for unpaid wages and liquidated damages. The Contracting Officer may withnold from the Contractor, from any moneys payable on account of work performed by the Contractor or subcontractor, such amounts as may administrative 1y be determined to be necessary to satisfy any liabilities of the Contractor or subcontractor for unpaid wages and liquidated damages as provided in paragraph (b) above. (d) Subcontracts. The Contractor and subcontractor shall insert paragraphs (a) through (d) of this clause in all subcontracts. (e) Records. The Contractor shall maintain payroll records containing the information specified in 29 CFR 516.2(a). These records shall be preserved for 3 years from contract completion. The contractor will make the records available for inspection by authorized representatives of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the Department of Labor, and will permit such representatives to interview employees during w)orking hours on the job. (End of clause (R7-103.16(a)1971NOV) (R 7-607.11 1972 APR) (R 1-1T.303) , 52.222-26 EQUAL OPPORTUNITY. (APR1984) (a) If, during any 12-month period (including the 12 months preceding the award of this contract), the Contractor has been or is awarded nonexempt Federal contracts and/or subcontracts that have an aggregate value in excess of $10,000, the Contractor shall comply with subparagraphs (b)(1) through (11) below. Upon request, the Contractor shall provide information necessary to determine the applicability of this clause. (b) During performing this contract, the Contractor agrees as follows: (1) The Contractor shall not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. (2) The Contractor shall take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed, and that employees are treated during employment, without regard to their race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. This shall include, but not be limited to, (1) employment, (ii) upgrading, (iii) demotion. (iv) transfer, (v) recruitment or recruitment advertising, (vi) layoff or termination. (vii) rates of pay or other forms of compensation, and (viii) selection for training, including apprenticeship. (3) The Contractor shall post in conspicuous places available to employees and applicants for employment the notices to be provided by the Contracting Officer that explain this clause.
RS-RES-84-128 Page'38 (4) The Contractor shall, in all solicitations or advertisement for employees placed by or on behalf of the Contractor, state that all qualified applicants will receive consideration for employment without regard to race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. (5) The Contractor shall send, to each labor union or representative of workers with which it has a collective bargaining agreement or other contract or understanding, the notice to be provided by the Contracting Officer advising the labor union or workers' representative of the Contractor's comitments under this clause, and post copies of the notice in conspicuous places available to employees and applicants for employment. (6) The Contractor shall comply with Executive Order 11246, as amended, and the rules, regulations, and orders of the Secretary of Labor. (7) The Contractor shall furnish to the contracting agency all information reguired by Executive Order 11246, as amended, and by the rules, regulations, and orders of the Secretary of Labor. Standard Fom 100 (EEO-1), or any successor form, is the prescribed form to be filed within 30 days following the award, unless filed within 12 months preceding the date of award. (8) The Contractor shall pemit access to its books, records, and accounts by the contracting agency or the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (0FCCP) for the purposes of investigation to ascertain the Contractor's compliance with the applicable rules, regulations, and orders. (9) If the OFCCP determines that the Contractor is not in compliance with this clause or any rule, regulation, or ordar of the Secretary of Labor, this contract may be canceled, terminated, or suspended in whole or in part and the Contractor nay be declared ineligible for further Government contracts, under the procedures authorized in Executive Order 11246, as amended. In addition, sanctions may be imposed and remedies invoked against the Contractor as provided in Executive Order 11246, as amended, the rules, regulations, and orders of the Secretary of Labor, or as otherwise provided by law. (10) The Centractor shall include the terms and conditions of subparagraph (b)(1) through (11) of this clause in every subcontract or purchase order that is not exempted by the rules, regulations, or orders of the Secretary of Labor issued under Executive Order 11246, as amended, so that these terms and conditions will be binding upon each subcontractor or vendor. (11) The Contractor shall take such action with respect to any subcontract or purchase order as the contracting agency may direct as a means of enforcing these terms and conditions, including sanctions for noncompliance; provided, that if the Contractor becomes involved in, or is threatened with, litigation with a subcontractor or vendor as a result of any direction, the Contractor may request the United States to enter into the litigation to protect the interests of the United States. (c) Notwithstanding any other clause in this contract, disputes relative to this clause will be governed by the procedures in 41 CFR 60-1.1. (End of clause) (R 7-103.18 1978 SEP) (R 1-12.803-2) (R 7-607.13 1978 SEP) 52.222-35 AFFIRMATIVE ACTION FOR SPECIAL DISABLED AND VIETNAM ERA VETERANS (APR1984) (a) Definitions.
" Appropriate office of the State employment service system," as used in this clause, means the local office of the Federal-State national system of public
RS-RES-84-128 Page 39 employment offices assigned to serve the area where the employment opening is to be filled, including the District of Columbia, Guam, Puerto Rico, Virgin Islands, American Samoa., and the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands.
" Openings that the Contractor proposes to fill from within its own organization " as used in this clause, means employment openings for which no one outside the Contractor's organization (including any affiliates, subsidiaries, and the parent companies) will be considered and includes any openings that the Contractor proposes to fill from regularly established
" recall" lists.
" Openings that the Contractor proposes to fill under a customary and traditional employer-union hiring arrangement," as used in this clause, means employment openings that the Contractor proposes to fill from union halls, under their customary and traditional employer-union hiring relationship.
" Suitable employment openings," as used in this clause--
(1) Includes, but is not limited to, openings that occur in jobs categorized as--
- 1) Production and nonproduction;
- 11) Plant and office; iii) Laborers and mechanics; iv) Supervisory and nonsupervisory; v) Technical; and vi) Executive, administrative, and professional positions compensated on a salary basis of less that $25,000 a year; and (2) Includes full-time employment, temporary employment of over 3 days, and part-time employment, but not openings that the Contractor proposes to fill from within its own organization or under a customary and traditional employer-union hiring arrangement, nor openings in an educational institution that are restricted to ctudents of that institution.
(b) General. (1) Regarding any' position for which the employee or applicant for employment is qualified, the Contractor shall not discriminate against the individual because the individual is a special disabled or Vietnam Era veteran. The Contractor agrees to take affimative action to employ, advance in employment, and otherwise treat qualified special disabled and Vietnam Era veterans without discrimination based upon their disability or veterans' status in all employment practices such as--
- 1) Employment;
. 11) Upgrading; iii) Demotion or transfer; iv) Recruitment; v) Advertising; vi) Layoff or temination; vii) Rates of pay or other forms of compensation; and viii) Selection for training, including apprenticeship. (2) The Contractor agrees to comply with the rules, regulations, and relevant orders of the Secretary of Labor (Secretary) issued under the Vietnam Era Veterans' Readjustment Assistance Act of 1972 (the Act), as amended. (q) Listing openings. (1) The Contractor agrees to list all suitable employment openings existing at contract award or occuring during contract perfomance, at an appropriate office of the State employment service system in the locality where the opening occurs. These openings include those occuring at any Contractor facility, including one not connected with performing this contract. An independent corporate affiliate is exempt from this requirement.
4 RS-RES-84-128 Page 40 i (2) State and local government agencies holding Federal contracts of
$10,000 or more shall also list all their suitable openings with the appropriate 1
office of the State employment service. (3) The listing of suitable employment openings with the State employment service system is required at least concurrently with using any other 4 i recruitment source or effort and involves the obligations of placing a bona fide job order, including accepting referrals of veterans and nonveterans. This , listing does not require hiring any particular job applicant or hiring from any
- particular group of job applicants and is not intended to relieve the Contractor 4 from any. requirements of Executive orders or regulations concerning nondiscrimination in employment.
(4) Whenever the Contractor becomes contractually bound to the listing
. terms of this clause, it shall advise the State employment service system, in each State where it has establishments, of the name and location of each hiring location in the State. As long as the Contractor is contractually bound to
, these ' tems and has so advised the State system, it need not advise the State j system of subsequent contracts. The Contractor may advise the State system when
- _ it is no longer bound by this contract clause.
(5) Under the most compelling circumstances, an employment opening may not be suitable for listing, including situations when (1) the Government's r needs cannot reasonably be supplied (ii) listing would be contrary to national i security, or (iii) the requirement of listing would not be in the Government's 4 interest. (d) Applicability. (1) DThis clause does not apply to the listing of ! employment openings which occur and are filled outside the 50 states, the
- District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, Guam, Virgin Islands, American Samoa, and the t Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands. '
(2) The. terms of paragraph (c) above of this clause do not apply to i openings that the Contractor proposes to fill from within its own organization or under a customary and traditional employer-union hiring arrangement. This exclusion does not apply to a particular opening once an employer decides to ! consider applicants outside of its own organization or employer-union
- arrangement for that opening.
e) Postings. (1) The Contractor agrees to post employment notices stating (1) (the Contractor's obligation under the law to take affirmative action to employ and advance in employment special disabled veterans and i veterans of the Vietnam era, and (ii) qualified the rights of applicants and employees. ' ! (2)'These notices shall .Se posted in conspicuous places that are . available to employees and applicants for employment. They shall be in a form i prescribed by the Director, Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs, i Department of Labor (Director), and provided by or through the Contracting Officer. (3) The Contractor shall notify each labor union or representative of ! workers with which it has a collective bargaining agreement or other contract. understanding, that the Contractor is bound by the terms of the Act, and is ! comitted to take affirmative action to employ, and advance in employment, j qualified special disabled and Vietnam Era veterans. ! (f) Noncompliance. If the Contractor does not comply with the requirements
- of this clause, appropriate actions may be taken under the rules, regulations, j and relevant orders of the Secretary issued pursuant to the Act.
(g) Subcontracts. The Contractor shall include the terms of this clause in
! every subcontract or purchase order of $10,000 or more unless exempted by rules, i regulations, or orders of the Secretary. The Contractor shall act as specified
! by the Director to enforce the terms, including action for noncompliance. e e i a * . ..
-_~c--- ,e.. - _ , ...--.....,..-,_-__.,_..e.~.__..-_- ,.~.__...,..,.-.v._m- c., m_- _ . ~ , , , . . . . . , - - - , . . . , - ,
RS-RES-84-128 j Page 41 (End of clause) l (R 7-103.27 1976 JUL) (R FPR Temp. Reg. 39) 52.222-36 AFFIRMATIVE ACTION FOR HANDICAPPED WORKERS (APR 1984) (a) General. (1) Regarding any position for which the employee or applicant for employment is qualified, the Contractor shall not discriminate against any employee or applicant because of physical or mental handicap. The Contractor agrees to take affirmative action to employ, advance in employment, and otherwise treat qualified handicapped individuals without discrimination based upon their physical or mental handicap in all employment practices such as-- (1) Employment;
- 11) Upgrading; iii)Demotionortransfer; iv) Recruitment; v) Advertising; vi) Layoff or termination; i
vii) Rates of pay or other forms of compensation; and viii) Selection for training, including apprenticeship. (2) The Contractor agrees to comply with the rules, regulations, and relevant orders of the Secretary of Labor (Secretary) issued under the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.S.C. 793) (the Act), as amended. (b) Postings. (1) The Contractor agrees to post employment notices stating (1) the Contractor's obligation under the law to take affirmative action to employ and advance in employment qualified handicapped individuals and (ii) the rights of applicants and employees.
. (2) _These notices shall be posted in conspicuous places that are available to employees and applicants for employment. They shall be in a form prescribed by the Director, Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs, . Department of Labor (Director), and ~ provided by or through the Contracting Officer.
(3) The Contractor shall notify each labor union or representative of i, workers with which it has a collective bargaining agreement or other contract
- understanding, that the Contractor is bound by the terms of Section 503 of the Act and is comitted to take affirmative action to employ, and advance in
- _ employment, qualified physically and mentally handicapped individuals.
(c) Noncompliance. If the Contractor does not comply with the requirements of this clause, appropriate actions may be taken under the rules, regulations, and relevant orders of the Secretary issued pursuant to the Act. (d) Subcontracts. The Contractor shall include the terms of this clause in every subcontract or purchase order in excess of $2,500 unless exempted by rules, regulations, or orders of the Secretary. The Contractor shall act as specified by the Director to enforce the terms, including action for noncompliance. (End of clause) i (R 7-103.28 1976 MAY) (R FPR Temp. Reg. 38) 52.223-2 CLEAN AIR AND WATER. (APR 1984) (a) " Air Act," as used in this clause, means the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7401etseq.).
" Clean air standards," as used in this clause, means--
RS-RES-84-128 Page 42 (1) Any enforceable rules, regulations, guidelines, s tanda rds , limitations, orders , controls, prohibitions , work practices , or other requirements contained in, issued under, or otherwise adopted under the Air Act or Executive Order 11738; (2) An applicable implementation plan as described in section 110(d) of the Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7410(d)); (3) An approved implementation procedure or plan under section 111(c) or section 111(d) of the Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7411(c) or (d)); or (4) An approved implementation procedure under section 112(d) of the Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7412(d)).
" Clean water standards," as used in this clause, means any enforceable limitation, control, condition, prohibi tion, standard, or other requirement promulgated under the Water Act or contained in a permit issued to a discharger by the Environmental Protection Agency or by a State under an approved program, as authorized by section 402 of the Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1342), or by local government to ensure compliance with pretreatment regulations as required by section 307 of the Water Act (33 U.S.C.1317).
" Compliance," as used in this clause, means compliance with--
(1) Clean air or water standards; or (2) A schedule or plan ordered or approved by a court of competent jurisdiction, the Environmental Protection Agency, or an air or water pollution control agency under the requirements of the Air Act or Water Act and related regulations.
" Facility," as used in this clause, means any building, plant, installation, structure, mine, vessel or other floating craft, location, or site of operations, owned, leased, or supervised by a Contractor or subcontractor, used in the performance of a contract or subcontract. When a location or site of operations includes more than one butiding, plant, installation, or structure, the entire location or site shall be deemed a facility except when the Administrator, or a designee, .of the Environmental Protection Agency, determines that independent facilities are collocated in one geographical area.
" Water Act," as used in this clause, means Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C.1251 etseq).).
(b The Contractor agrees-- (1) To comply with all the requirements of section 114 of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7414) and section 308 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C.1318) relating to inspection, monitoring, entry, reports, and information, as well as other requirements specified in section 114 and section 308 of the Air Act and the Water Act, and all regulations and guidelines issued to implement those acts before the award of this contract; (2) That no portion of the work required by this prime contract will be performed in a facility listed on the Environmental Protection Agency List of Violating Facilities on the date when this contract was awarded unless and until the EPA eliminates the name of the facility from the listing; (3) To use best efforts to comply with clean air standards and clean water standards at the facility in which the contract is being performed; and (4) To insert the substance of this clause into any nonexempt subcontract, including this subparagraph (b)(4). (End of clause) (R 7-103.29 1975 0CT) (R 1-1.2302)
- e '
e
- s. . . _ _ _ - . . . -
RS-RES-84-128 Page 43 52.225-3 BUY AMERICAN ACT--SUPPLIES. (APR 1984) (a) The Buy American Act (41 U.S.C.10) provides that the Government give ! preference to domestic end products.
" Components," as used in this clause, means those articles, materials, and , supplies incorporated directly into the end products.
l - " Domestic end product," as used in this clause, means (1) an unmanufactured end product mined or produced in .the United States, or (2) an and product manufactured in the United States, if the cost of its components mined, produced, or manufactured in the United ' States exceeds 50 percent of the cost of all its components. Components of foreign origin of the same class or kind as the products referred to in subparagraphs (b)(2) or (3) of this clause shall be ~ treated as domestic. Scrap generated, collected, and prepared for processing in
. the United States is considered domestic.
! "End products," as used in this clause, means those articles, materials, and . supplies to be acquired for public use under this contract. (b) The Contractor shall deliver only domestic end products, except those-- 4
. (1) For use outside the United States; (2) That the Government determines are not mined, produced, or i manufactured in the United States in sufficient and reasonably available 1
commercial quantities of a satisfactory quality; , (3) For which the agency determines that domestic preference would be inconsistent with the public interest; or . (4) For which the agency determines the cost to be unreasonable. (The foregoing requirements are administered in accordance with Executive Order No.10582, dated December 17, 1954, as amended, and Subpart 25.1 of the ;
- Federal Acquisition Regulation.)(End of clause)
(R 7-104.3 1964 MAY) (R 1-6.104-5) 52.227-1 AUTHORIZATION AND CONSENT. (APR 1984) (a) The Government authorizes and consents to all use and manufacture, in performing this contract or any subcontract at an tier, of any invention t described in and covered by a United States patent (1)y embodied in the structure !; or composition of any article the delivery of which is accepted by the ! Government under this contract or (2) used in machinery, tools, or methods whose
- ' use necessarily results from compliance by the Contractor or a subcontractor with (1) specifications or written provisions forming a part of this contract or (ii) specific written instructions given by the Contracting Officer directing the manner of performance. The entire liability to the Government for
! infringement of a patent of the United States shall be determined solely by the provisions of the indemnity clause, if any, included in this contract or any i subcontract hereunder (including any lower-tier subcontract), and the Government i assumes liability for all other infringement to the extent of the authorization and consent hereinabove granted. (b) The contractor agrees to include, and require inclusion of, this clause, suitably modified to identify the parties, in all subcontracts at any tier for , supplies or services (including construction, archi. ict-engineer services, and materials, supplies, models, samples, and design' or testing services expected to exceed $25,000; however, omission of this clause from any subcontract, under or over $25,000, does not affect this authorization and consent. (End of clause) I i 4
-- +y - --,- ww-,-vure,--,v,,,, -,re-,------m---m-w-v---o-*w ,e---w v-e--=*-rir-- rv-vw-o e--e -en- v-- --o+g
1 RS-RES-84-128
- Page 44 1
t i (R 7-103.22 1961 JAN) 52.227-2 NOTICE AND ASSISTANCE, REGARDING PATENT AND COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT. (APR 1984) ! (a) The Contractor shall report to the Contracting Officer, promptly and in t reasonable written detail, each notice or claim of patent or copyright
- infringement based on the performance of this contract of which the Contractor !
has knowledge. .
, (b) In the event of any claim or suit against the Government on account of j any alleged patent or copyright infringement arising out of the performance of f this contract or out of the use of any supplies furnished or work or services L performed under this contract, the Contractor shall furnish to the Government, ,
when requested by the Contracting Officer, all evidence and information in ! i possession of the Contractor pertaining to such suit or claim. Such evidence and information shall be furnished at the expense of the Government except where ; l the Contractor has agreed to indemnify the Government. [
~
- (c) The Contractor agrees to include, and require inclusion of, this clause
- in all subcontracts at any tier for supplies or services (including construction i and architect-engineer subcont' r acts and those for material, supplies, models, samples, or design or testing services) expected to exceed the dollar amount set J
forth in 13.000 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR). (End of clause)
- (R 7-103.23 1965 JAN) ;
! 52.227-11 PATENT RIGHTS--RETENTION BY THE CONTRACTOR (SHORT FORM). ['
- (APR 1984)
! (a) Definitions.
"Invention" means any invention or discovery which is or may be patentable ;
or otherwise protectable under Title 35 of the United States Code, j " Subject invention" means any invention of the Contractor conceived or first actually reduced to practice in the performance of work under this contract. ! " Practical application" means to manufacture in the case of a composition or product, to practice in the case of a process or method, or to operate in the case of a machine or system; and, in each case, under such conditions as to 1 establish that the invention is being utilized and that its benefits are, to the i extent permitted by law or Government regulations, available to the public on t reasonable terms. ! "Made," when used in relation to any invention, means the conception or first actual reduction to practice of such invention.
"Small bJsiness firm" means a small domestic business concern as defined at Section 2 cf Public Law 85-536 (15 U.S.C. 632) and implementing regulations of
- the Administrator of the Small Business Administration. For the purpose of this
- clause, the size standards for small business concerns involved in Government
! procurement and subcontracting at 13 CFR 121.3-8 and 13 CFR 121.3-12, respectively, will be used. i " Nonprofit organization" means a domestic university or other institution of i higher education or an organization of the type described in section 501(c)(3)
! of the Internal Revenue Code of and exempt from taxation j under section 501(a) of the 1954 Internal (26 U.S.C.
Revenue Code 501(c)(26 501(a) U.S.C. or any j domestic nonprofit scientific or educational organization qualified under a ! state nonprofit organization statute. 4 6 i * -e
., . . . - - - - - - - - - . - - _ . _ ~ _ - . - - - - , - -
- -. . . ~ . - . - - - - . . _ _ _ _ . . . _
RS-RES-84-128 Page 45 4 - (b) Allocation of princip7.1 rights. The Contractor may retain the entire right, title, and interest througiout the world to each subject invention subject to the provisions of this clause and 35 U.S.C. 203. With respect to any i subject invention in which the Contractor retains title, the Federal Government ! shall have a nonexclusive, nontransferable, irrevocable, paid-up license to ! i practice or have practiced for or on behalf of the United States the subject ! invention throughout the world. . 1 (c) Invention disclosure, election of title, and filing of patent :
- applications by Contractor.
- (1) The Contractor shall disclose each subject invention to the 4 Contracting Officer within 2 months after the inventor discloses it in writing
! to Contractor personnel responsible for patent matters. The disclosure to the i Contracting Officer shall be in the form of a written report and shall ' identify the contract under which the invention was made and the ir.ventor(s). It shall 4 be sufficiently complete in technical detail to convey a clear understanding, to i the extent known at the time of the disclosure, 0; the nature, purpose. operation, and physical, chemical, biological, or electrical characteristics of the invention. The disclosure shall also identify any publication, on sale, or
- public use of the invention and whether a manuscript describing the invention
! has been submitted for publication and, if so, whether it has been accepted for
- publication at the time of disclosure. In addition, af:er disclosure to the 4
Contracting Officer, the Contractor shall promptly notify the Contracting Officer of the acceptance of any manuscript describing the invention for publication or of any on sale or public use planned by the Contractor. < . (2) The Contractor shall elect in writing whether or not to retain title <
- to any such invention by notifying ' the Federal agency within 12 months of l- disclosure; provided, that in 'any case where publication,.on sale, or public use i
has initiated the ,1-year statutory period wherein valid patent protection can i
- still be obtair.ed in the United States, the period of election of title may be
- - shortened by the agency to a date that is no more than 60 days prior to the end i of the statutory period.
1 (3) The Contractor shall file its initial patent application on an elected invention within 2 years after election or, if earlier, prior to the end 1 - of any statutory period wherein valid patent protection can be obtained in the j - United States after a publication, on sale, or public use. The Contractor will file patent applications in additional countries within either 10 months of the corresponding initial patent application or 6 months from the date permission is
- granted by the Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks to file foreign patent
!- applications whers such filing has been prohibited by a Secrecy Order. ! (4) Requests for extension of the time for disclosure to the Contracting
- 3. Officer, election, and filing may, at the discretion of the funding Federal 4
i agency), be granted. (d Conditions when the Government may obtain title. The Contractor shall l' convey to the Federal agency, upon written request, title to any subject invention-- .
- (1) If the Contractor fails to disclose or elect the subject invention i within the times specified in paragraph (c) above, or elects not to retain title :
! (the agency may only request title within 60 days after learning of the '
Contractor's failure to report or elect within the specified times); i (2) In those countries in which the Contractor fails to file patent applications within the times specified in paragraph (c) aboyc; provided, however, that if the Contractor has filed a patent application in a country 4 after the times specified in paragraph (c) above, but prior to its receipt of , i I 4
RS-RES-84-128 Page 46 the written request of the Federal agency, the Contractor shall continue to retain title in that country; or (3) In any country in which the Contractor decides not to continue the prosecution of any application for, to pay the maintenance fees on, or defend in reexamination or opposition proceeding on, a patent on a subject invention. (e) Minimum rights to contractor. (1) The Contractor shall retain a nonexclusive, royalty-f ree license throughout the world in cach subject invention to which the Government obtains title except if the Contractor fails to disclose the subject invention within the times specified in paragraph (c) above. The Contractor's license extends to its domestic subsidiaries and affiliates, if any, within the corporate structure of which the Contractor is a part and includes the right to grant sublicenses of the same scope to the extent the Contractor was legally obligated to do so at the time the contract was awarded. The license is transferable only with the approval of the funding Federal agency except when transferred to the successor of that part of the Contractor's business top which the invention pertains. (2) The Contractor's domestic license may be revoked or modified by the funding Federal agency to the extent necessary to achieve expeditious practical application of the subject invention pursuant to an application for an exclusive license submitted in accordance with applicable provisions in the Federal Property Management Regulations and agency licensing regulations (if any). This license shall not be revoked in that field of use or the geographical areas in which the Contractor has achieved practical application and continues to make the benefits of the invention reasonably accessible to the public. The license in any foreign country may be revoked or modified at the discretiun of the funding Federal agency to the extent the Contractor, its licensees, or its domestic subsidiaries or affiliates have failed to achieve practical application in that foreign country. (3) Before revocation of modification of the license, the funding Federal agency shall furnish the Contractor a written notice of its intention to revoke or modify the license, and the Contractor shall be allowed 30 days (or such other time as may be authorized by the funding Federal agency for good cause shown by the Contractor) after the notice to show cause why the license should not be revoked or modified. The Contractor has the right to appeal, in accordance with applicable agency licensing regulations (if any) and the Federal Property Management Regulations concerning the licensing of Government- owned inventions, any decision concerning the revocation or modification of its license. (f) Contractor action to protect the Government's interest. (1) The Contractor agrees to execute or to have executed and promptly deliver to the Federal agency all instruments necessary to (1) establish or confirm the rights j the Government has throughout the world in those subject inventions to which the Contractor elects to retain title, and (ii) convey title to the Federal agency i when requested under paragraph (d) above, and to enable the Government to obtain i patent protection throughout the world in that subject invention. l (2) The Contractor agrees to require, by written agreement, its } employees, other than clerical and nontechnical employees, to disclose promptly in writing to personnel identified as responsible for the administration of
- patent matters and in a format suggested by
! the Contractor each subject invention made under contract in order that the l Contractor can comply with the disclosure provisions of paragraph (c) above, and to execute all papers necessary to file patent applications on subject l inventions and to establish the Government's rights in the subject inventions. This disclosure format should require, as a minimum, the information required by l ( .
RS-RES-84-128 Page 47 subparagraph (c)(1) above. The Contractor shall instruct such employees through employee agreements or other suitable educational programs on the importance of reporting inventions in sufficient time to pemit the filing of patent applications prior to U.S. or foreign statutory bars. (3) The Contractor shall notify the Federal agency of any decision not to continue -the prosecution of a patent application, pay maintenance fees, or defend in a reexamination or opposition proceeding on a patent, in any country, not less than 30 days before the expiration of the response period required by the relevant patent office.- (4) The Contractor agrees to include, within the specification of any United States patent application and any patent issuing thereon covering a subject invention, the following statement: "This invention was made with Government sup under (identify the contract) awarded by (identify the Federal agency)portThe Government has certain rights in this invention." (g) Subcontracts. (1) The Contractor shall include this clause (52.227-11 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR)), suitably modified to identify the parties, in all subcontracts, regardless of tier, for experimental, developmental, or research work to be performed by a small business firm or nonprofit organization. The subcontractur shall retain all rights provided for the Contractor in this clause, and the Contractor shall not, as part of the consideration for awarding the subcontract, obtain rights in the subcontractor's subject inventions. (2) In the case of subcontracts, at any tier, when the prime award with the Federal agency was a contract (but not a grant or cooperative agreement).
, the agency, subcontractor, and the Contractor agree that the mutual obligations of the parties created by this clause constitute a contract between the subcontractor and the Federal agency with respect to those matters covered by this clause. - .
(h) Reporting utilization of sub.iect inventions. The Contractor agrees to submit on request periodic reports no more frequently than annually on. the
> utilization of a subject invention or on efforts at obtaining such utilization that are being made by the Contractor or its licensees or assignees. Such reports shall include information regarding the status of development, date of first commercial sale or use, gross royalties received by the Contractor, and such other data and information as the agency may reasonably specify. The Contractor also agrees to provide additional reports as may be requested by the agency in connection with any march-in proceedings undertaken by the agency in accordance with paragraph (j) of this clause. To the extent data or information , supplied under this paragraph is considered by the Contractor..its licensee, or assignee to be privileged and confidential and is so marked, the agency agrees that, to the extent permitted by law, it shall not disclose such infomation to persons outside the Government.
(i) Preference for United States industry. Not withstanding any other provision of this clause, the Contractor agrees that neither it nor any assignee will grant to any person the exclusive right to use or sell any subject invention in the United States unless such person agrees that any products embodying the subject invention will be manufactured substantially in the United States. However, in individual cases, the requirement for such an agreement may be waived by the Federal agency upon a showing by the Contractor'or its assignee that reasonable but unsuccessful efforts have been made to grant licenses on similar terms to potential licensees that would be likely to manufacture substantially in the United States or that under the circumstances domestic manufacture is not commercially feasible.
RS-RES-84-128 page 48 (j) March-in rights. (1) The Contractor agrees that with respect to any subject invention in which it has acquired title, the Federal agency has the right in accordance with the procedures in FAR 27.304- 1(g) to require the Contractor, an assignee, or exclusive licensee of a subject invention to grant a nonexclusive, partially exclusive, or exclusive license in any field of use to a responsible applicant or applicants, upon terms that are reasonable under the circumstances, and if the Contractor, assignee, or exclusive licensee refuses such a request, the Federal agency has the right to grant such a license itself if the Federal agency determines that-- (1) Such action is necessary because the Contractor or assignee has not taken, or is not expected to take within a reasonable time, effective steps to achieve practical application of the subject invention in such field of use; (ii) Such action is necessary to alleviate health or safety needs which are not. reasonably satisfied by the Contractor, assignee, or their licensees; (iii) Such action is necessary to meet requirements for public use specified by Federal regulations and such requirements are not reasonably i satisfied by(the Contractor, iv) Such action assignee, is necessary or licensees; because the or agreement required by paragraph (1) of this ciause has not been obtained or waived or because a licensee of the exclusive right to use or sell any subject invention in the United States is in breach of such agreement. , (k) Special provisions for contracts with nonprofit organizations. If the Contractor is a nonprofit organization, it agrees that-- (1) Rights to a subject invention in the United States may not be assigned without the approval of the Federal agency, except where such assignment is made to an organization which has as one of its primary functions the management of inventions and which is not, itself, engaged in or does not hold a substantial interett in other organizations engaged in the manufacture or sale of products or the use of processes that might utilize the invention or be in competition with embodiments of the invention (provided, that such assignee will be subject to the same provisions as the Contractor); (2) The Contractor may not grant exclusive licenses under United States
- patents or patent applications in subject inventions to persons other than small i business firms for a period in excess of the earlier of--
(i) Five years from first commercial sale or use of the invention; or (ii) Eight years from the date of the exclusive license excepting that time before regulatory agencies necessary to obtain premarket clearance, unless on a case-by-case basis, the Federal agency approves a longer exclusive license. If exclusive field-of-use licenses are granted, commercial sale or use in one field of use will not be deemed comercial sale or use as to other fields of use, and a first commercial sale of use with respect to a product of the invention will not be deemed to end the exclusive period to different subsequent products covered by the invention; (3) The Contractor shall share royalties collected on a subject invention with the inventor; and (4) The balance of any royalties or income earned by the Contractor with respect to subject inventions, after payment of expenses (including payments to inventors) incidental to the administration of subject inventions, will be utilized for the support of scientific research or education. (1) Communications. Reserved. (End of clause) (R 7-302.23(h) 1981 JUL) -
# 4
RS-RES-84-128 Page 49 52.228-7 INSURANCE LIABILITY TO THIRD PERSONS. (APR 1984) (a) (1) Except as provided in subparagraph (2) immediately following, or in paragraph (h) of this clause (if the clause has a paragraph (h)), the Contractor shall provide and maintain workers' compensation, employer's liability, comprehensive general liability (bodily injury) , comprehensive automobile liability (bodily injury and property damage) insurance, and such other insurance as the Contracting Officer may require under this contract. (2) The Contractor may, with the approval of the Contracting Officer, maintain a self-insurance program; provided that, with respect to workers' compensation, the Contractor is qualified pursuant to statutory authority. (3) All insurance required by this paragraph shall be in a form and amount and for those periods as the Contracting Officer may require or approve and with insurers approved by the Contracting Officer. (b) The Contractor agrees to submit for the Contracting Officer's approval, to the extent and in the manner required by the Contracting Officer, any other insurance that is maintained by the Contractor in connection with the performance of this contract and for which the Contractor seeks reimbursement. (c) Except as provided in paragraph (h) of this clause (if the clause has a paragraph (h)), the Contractor shall be reimbursed-- (1) For that portion (1) of the reasonable cost of insurance allocable to this contract and (ii) required or approved under this clause; and (2) For certain liabilities (and expenses incidental to such liabilities) to third persons not compensated by insurance or otherwise without regard to and as an exception to the limitation of cost or the limitation of funds clause of this contract. These liabilities must arise out of the performance of this contract, whether or not caused by the negligence of the Contractor or of the Contractor's agents, servants, or employees, and must be represented by final judgments or settlements approved in writing by the Government. These liabilities are for-- (1) Loss of or damage to property (other than property owned, occupied, or used by the Contractor, rented to the Contractor, or in the care, custody, or control of the Contractor); or (ii) Death or bodily injury. (d) The Government's liability under paragraph (c) of this clause is subject to the availability of appropriated funds at the time a contingency occurs. Nothing in this contract shall be construed as implying that the Congress will, at a later date, appropriate funds sufficient to meet deficiencies. (e) The Contractor shall not be reimbursed for liabilities (and expenses incidental to such liabilities)-- (1) For which the Contractor is otherwise responsible under the express terms of any clause specified in the Schedule or elsewhere in the contract; (2) For which the Contractor has failed to insure or to maintain insurance as required by the Contracting Officer; or (3) That result from willful misconduct or lack of good faith on the part of any of the Contractor's directors, officers, managers, superintendents, or other representatives who have supervision or direction of-- (i) All or substantially all of the Contractor's business; (11) All or substantially all of the Contractor's operations at any one plant or separate location in which this contract is being performed; or (iii) A separate and complete major industrial operation in connection with the performance of this contract. (f) The provisions of paragraph (e) of this clause shall not restrict the right of the Contractor to be reimbursed for the cost of insurance maintained by
RS-RES-84-128 Page 50 the Contractor in connection with the performance of this contract, other than insurance required in accordanc.e with this clause; provided, that such cost is allowable under the Allowable Cost and Payment clause of this contract. (g) If any suit or action is filed or any claim is made against the Contractor, the cost and expense of which may be reimbursable to the Contractor under this contract, and the risk of which is then uninsured or is insured for less than the amount claimed, the Contractor shall-- (1) Immediately notify the Contracting Officer and promptly furnish copies of all pertinent papers received; (2) Authorize Government representatives to collaborate with counsel for the insurance carrier in settling or defending the claim when the amount of the liability claimed exceeds the amount of coverage; and (3) Authorize Government representatives to settle or defend the claim and to represent the Contractor in or to take charge of any litigation, if required by the Government, when the liability is not insured or covered by bond. The Contractor may, at its own expense, be associated with the Government representatives in any such claim or litigation. (End of clause) (R 7-203.22 1966 DEC) (R1-7.204-5) 52.230-3 COST ACCOUNTING STANLmR05. (APR 1984) (a) Unless the Cost Acenunting Standards Board (CASB) has prescribed rules or regulations exempting the Contractor or this contract from standards, rules, and regulations promulgated pursuant to 50 U.S.C. App. 2168 (Pub. L. 91-379, August 15, 1970), the Contractor, in connection with this contract, shall-- (1) (National Defense Contracts Only) By submission of a Disclosure Statement, disclose in writing the Contractor's cost accounting practices as required by regulati.ons of the CASB. The practices disclosed for this contract shall be the same as the practices current'y disclosed and applied on all other contracts and subcontracts being performed by the Contractor and which contain a Cost Accounting Standards (CAS) clause. If the Contractor has notified the Contracting Officer that the Disclosure Statement contains trade secrets and commercial or financial information which is privileged ard confidential, the Disclosure Statement shall be protected and shall not be released outside of the Government. (2) Follow consistently the Contractor's cost accounting practices in accumulating and reporting contract performance cost data concerning this contract. If any change in cost accounting practices is made for the purposes of any contract or subcontract subject to CASB requirements, the change must be applied prospectively to this contract, and the Disclosure Statement must be amended accordingly. If the contract price or cost allowance of this contract is affected by such chan shall be made in accordance with subparagraph (a)(4) or (a)(ges, adjustment 5) below, as appropriate. (3) Comply with all CAS in effect on the date of award of this contract or, if the Contractor has submitted cost or pricing data, on the date of final agreement on price as shown on the Contractor's signed certificate of current cost or pricing data. The Contractor shall also comply with any CAS which hereafter becomes applicable to a contract or subcontract of the Contractor. Such compliance shall be required prospectively from the date of applicability to such contract or subcontract. (4) (1) Agree to an equitable adjustment as provided in the Changes clause of this contract if the contract cost is affected by a change which, 8 4
RS-RES-84-128 Page 51 pursuant to (3) above, the Contractor is required to make to the Contractor's established cost accounting practices. (ii) Negotiate with the Contracting Officer to determine the terms and conditions under which a change may be made to a cost accounting practice, other than a change made under other provisions of this paragraph 4; provided, that no agreement may be made under this provision that will increase costs paid by the United States. (iii) When the parties agree to a change to a cost accounting practice, other than a change under (4)(1) above, negotiate an equitable adjustment as provided in the Changes clause of this contract. (5) Agree to an adjustment of the contract price or cost allowance, as appropriate, if the Contractor or a subcontractor fails to comply with an applicable Cost Accounting Standard or to follow any cost accounting practice consistently and such failure results in any increased costs paid by the United States. Such adjustment shall provide for recovery of the increased costs to the United States together with interest thereon computed at the rate determined by the Secretary of the Treasury pursuant to Pub. L. 92-41, 85 Stat. 97, or 7 percent per annum, whichever is less, from the time the payment by the United States was made to the time the adjustment is effected. (b) If the parties fail to agree whether the Contractor or a subcontractor has complied with an applicable CAS, rule, or regulation of the CASB and as to any cost adjustment demanded by the United States, such failure to agree shall be a dispute concerning a question of fact within the meaning of the Disputes clause of this contract. (c) The Contractor shall permit any authorized representatives of the agency head, of the CASB, or of the Comptroller General of the United States to examine and make copies of any documents, papers, or records relating to compliance with the requirements of this clause. (d) The Contractor shall include in all negotiated subcontracts which the Contractor enters into, the substance of this clause, except paragraph (b), and shall require such inclusion in all other subcontracts, of any tier, including the obligation to comply with all CAS in effect on the subcor. tract's award date or if the subcontractor has submitted cost or pricing data, cr. the date of final agreement on price as shown on the subcontractor's signed Certificate of Current Cost or Pricing Data. This requirement shall apply only to negotiated subcontracts in excess of $100,000 where the price negotiated is not based on-- (1) Established catalog or market prices of coninercial items sold in substantial quantities to the general public; or (2) Prices set by law or regulation, and except that the requirement shall not apply to negotiated subcontracts otherwise exempt from the requirement to include a CAS clause by reason of 331.30(b) of Title 4 Code of Federal-Regulations (4 CFR 331.30(b)). Note (1): New CAS shall be applicable to both national defense and nondefense CAS-covered contracts upon award of a new national defense CAS-covered contract containing the new. Standard. The award of a new nondefense CAS-covered contract shall not trigger application of new CAS. Note (2): Subcontractors shall be required to submit their Disclosure Statements to the Contractor. However, if a subcontractor has previously submitted its Disclosure Statement to a Government Administrative Contracting Officer (AC0), it may satisfy that requirement by certifying to the Contractor the date of the Statement and the address of the ACO. Note (3): In any case where a subcontractor determines that the Disclosure Statement infonnation is privileged and confidential and declines to provide it to the Contractor or higher tier subcontractor, the Contractor may authorize
RS-RES-84-128 Page 52 direct submission of that subcontractor's Disclosure Statement to the same Government offices to which the Contractor was required to make submission of its Disclosure Statement. Such authorization shall in no way relieve the Contractor of liability as provided in paragraph (a)(5) of this clause. In view of the foregoing and since the contract may be subject to adjustment under this clause,by reason of any failure to comply with rules, regulations, and Standards of the CASB in connection with covered subcontracts, it is expected that the Contractor may wish to include a clause in each such subcontract requiring the subcontractor to appropriately indemnify the Contractor. However, the inclusion of such a clause and the terms thereof are matters for negotiation and agreement between the Contractor and the subcontractor, provided that they do not conflict with the duties of the Contractor under its contract with the Government. It is also expected that any subcontractor subject to such indemnification will generally require substantially similar indemnification to be submitted by its subcontractors. Note (4): If the subcontractor is a business unit which, pursuant to 4 CFR 332 is entitled to elect modified contract coverage and to follow Standards 401 and 402, the clause at 52.230-5, " Disclosure Consistency of Cost Accounting Practices," of the Federal Acquisition Regulation shall be inserted in lieu of this clause. Note (5): The terms defined in 4 CFR 331.20 shall have the same meanings herein. As there defined, " negotiated subcontract" means any subcontract except a firm-fixed-price subcontract made by a Contractor or subcontractor after receiving offers from at least two persons not associated with each other or with such Contractor er subcontractor, providing (1) the solicitation to all competitors is identical (2) orice is the only consideration in selecting the subcontractor from among the competitors solicited, and (3) the lowest offer received in compliance with the solicitation from among those solicited is accepted. ' (End of clause) (R7-104.83(a)1975FEB) (R 1-3.1204-1(a)(1)) (R1-3.1204-2(a)) 52.230-4 ADMINISTRATION OF COST ACCOUNTING STANDARDS. (APR1984) For the purpose of administering the Cost Accounting Standards (CAS) requirements under this contract, the Contractor shall take the steps outlined in (a) through (f) below: (a) Submit to the cognizant Contracting Officer a description of any accounting change, the potential impact of the change on contracts containing a CAS clause, and if not obviously 1 material, a general dollar magnitude cost impact analysis of the change which displays the potential shift of costs between CAS-covered contracts by contract type (i.e., firm-fixed-price, incentive. cost-plus-fixed-fee, etc.) and other contractor business activity. As related to CAS-covered contracts, the analysis should display the potential impact of fundt, of the various Agencies / Departments (i.e., Department of Energy, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Army, Navy, Air Force, other Department of Defense, other Government) as follows: (1) For any change in cost accounting practices required to comply with a new CAS in accordance with paragraphs (a)(3) and (a)(4)(1) of the CAS clause, within 60 days (or such other date as may be mutually agreed to) after award of - a contract requiring this change.
- 0 a
RS-RES-84-128 Page 53 (2) For an change in cost accounting practices proposed in accordance with parag(raph (a)(3) or (a)y(4)(ii) a)(5) of the Disclosure or (a)(4)(iii) and Consistency of the of Cost CAS Practices Accounting clause or with p clause, not less than 60 days (or such other date as may be mutually agreed to) before the effective date of the proposed change. (3) For any failure to comply with an applicable CAS or to follow a disclosed practice as contemplated by paragraph (a)(5) of the CAS clause or by paragraph (a)(4) of the Disclosure and Consistency of Cost Accounting Practices clause, within 60 days (or such other date as may be mutually agreed to) after the date of agreement of noncompliance by the Contractor. (b) Submit a cost impact proposal in the form and manner specified by the cognizant Contracting Officer within 60 days (or such other date as may be mutually agreed to) after the date of determination of the adequacy and compliance of a change submitted pursuant to (a) above. If the above proposal is not submitted within the specified time, or any extension granted by the cognizant Contracting Officer, an amount not to exceed 10 percent of each payment made after that date may be withheld until such time as a proposal has been provided in the form and manner specified by the cognizant Contracting Officer. (c) Agree to appropriate contract and subcontract amendments to reflect adjustments established in accordance with paragraphs (a)(4) and (a)(5) of the CAS clause or with paragraphs (a)(3), (a)(4), or (a)(5) of the Disclosure and Consistency of Cost Accounting Practices clause. (d) For all subcontracts subject either to the CAS clause or to the Disclosure and Consistency of Cost Accounting Practices clause--
- 1) So state in the body of the subcontract, in the letter of award, or in both self-deleting clauses shall not be used); and
- 2) Include the substance of this clause in all negotiated subcontracts.
In addition, within 30 days after award of the subcontract, submit the following information to the Contractor's cognizant contract administration office for transmittal to the contract administration office cognizant of the subcontractor's facility: i) Subcontractor's name and subcontract number,
- 11) Dollar amount and date of award.
iii) Name of Contractor making the award. iv) Any changes the subcontractor has made or proposes to make to accounting practices that affect prime contracts or subcontracts containing the CAS clause or Disclosure and Consistency of Cost Accounting Practices clause, unless these changes have already been reported. If award of the subcontract results in making one or more CAS effective for the first time, this fact shall also be reported. (e) Notify the Contracting Officer in writing of any adjustments required to subcontracts under this contract and agree to an adjustment, based on them, to this contract's price or estimated cost and fee. This notice is due within 30 days after proposed subcontract adjustments are received and shall include a proposal for adjusting the higher tier subcontract or the prime contract appropriately. (f) For subcontracts containing the CAS clause, require the subcontractor to comply with all Standards in effect on the date of award or of final agreement on price, as shcwn on the subcontractor's signed Certificate of Current Cost or Pricing Data, whichever is earlier. (End of clause) (R 7-104.83(b) 1977 OCT) (R 1-3.1204-1(b))
RS-RES-84-128 Page 54 52.230-5 OISCLOSURE AND CONSISTENCY OF COST ACCOUNTING PRACTICES. (APR 1984) (a) The Contractor, in connection with this contract, shall-- (1) Comply with the requirements of 4 CFR Parts 101, Consistency in Estimating, Accumulating, and Reporting Costs, and 402, Consistency in Allocating Costs Incurred for the Same Purpose, in effect on the date of award of this contract. (2) (National Defense Contracts Only) If it is a business unit of a company required to submit a Disclosure Statement, disclose in writing its cost accoenting practices as required by regulations of the Cost Accounting Standards Board (CASB). If the Contractor has notified the Contracting Officer that the Disclosure Statement contains trade secrets and corrunercial or financial infomation which is privileged and confidential, the Msclosure Statement shall be protected and shall not be released outside of the 'iu ernment. Note (1): Subcontractors shall be req"tred
- submit their Disclosure Statements to the Contractor. However, if a sutcontractor has previously submitted its Disclosure Statement to a Gover meat Administrative Contracting Officer (ACO), it may satisfy that requirement by certifying to the Contractor the date of the Statement and the address of t' $ Contracting Officer.
Note (2): In any case where a subcontracts determines that the Disclosure Statement infomation is priviltisd and confidential and declines to provide it to the Contractor or higher tier subcontractor, the Contractor may authorize direct submission of the subcontrac.or's Disclosure Statement to the samo Gcvernment offices to which the Contractor was required to make submission of its Disclosure Statement. Such authorization shall in no way relieve the Contractor of liability if it or a subcontractor fails to comply with an applicable Cost Accounting Standard (CAS) or to follow any practice disclosed pursuant to this paragraph and such failure results in any increased costs paid by the United States. In view of the foregoing and since the contract may be subject to adjustment under this clause by reason of any failure to comply with rules, regulations, and Standards of the CASB in connection with covered subcontracts, it is expected that the Contractor may wish to include a clause in each such subcontract requiring the subcontractor to appropriately Indemnify the Contractor. However, the inclusion of such a clause and the terms thereof are matters for negotiation and agreement between the Contractor and subcontractor, provided that they do not conflict with the duties of the Contractor under its contract with the Government. It is also expected that any subcontractor subject to such indemnification will generally require substantially similar indemnification to be submitted by its subcontractors. Note (3): The terms defined in 4 CFR 331.20 shall have the same meanings in this clause. As there defined " negotiated subcontract" means any subcontract except a firm-fixed-price subcontract made by a Contractor or subcontractor after receiving offers from at least two persons not associated with each other or such Contractor or subcontractor, providing (1) the solicitation to all competitors is identical, (2) price is the only consideration in selecting the subcontractor from among the competitors solicited, and (3) the lowest offer received in compliance with the solicitation from among those solicited is accepted (3) (i) Follow consistently the Contractor's cost accounting practices. A change to such practices may be proposed, however, by either the Government or the Contractor, and the Contractor agrees to negotiate with the Contracting Officer the terms and conditions under which a change may be made. After the terms and conditions under which the change is to be made have been agreed to. n.
RS-RES-84-128 Page 55 the change must be applied prospectively to this contract, and the Disclosure Statement, if affected, must be amended accordingly. (11) The Contractor shall, when the parties agree to a change to a cost accounting practice and the Contracting Officer has made the finding required in 332.51 of the CASB's regulations, negotiate an equitable adjustment as provided in the Changes clause of this contract. In the absence of the required finding, no agreement may be made under this contract clause that will increase costs paid by the United States. (4) Agree to an adjustment of the contract price or cost allowance, as appropriate, if the Contractor or a subcontractor fails to comply with the applicable CAS or to follow any cost accounting practice, and such failure results in any increased costs paid by the United States. Such adjustment shall provide for recovery of the increased costs to the United States together with interest thereon computed at the rate detennined by the Secretary of the Treasury pursuant to Pub. L. 92-41, 85 Stat. 97, or 7 percent per annum, whichever is less, from the time the payment by the United States was made to the time the adjustment is effected. (b) If the parties fail to agree whether the Contractor has complied with an applicable CAS, rule, or regulation of the CASB and as to any cost adjustment demanded by the United States, such failure to agree shall be a dispute within the meaning of the Disputes clause of this contract. (c) The Contractor shall permit any authorized representatives of the agency head, of the CASB, or of the Comptroller General of the United States to examine and make copies of any documents, papers, and records relating to compliance with the requirements of this clause. (d) The Contractor shall include in all negotiated subcontracts, which the Contractor enters into, the substance of this clause, except paragraph (b), and shall require such inclusion in all other subcontracts of any tier, except that-(1) If the subcontract is awarded to a business unit which pursuant to Part 331 is required to follow all CAS, the clause entitled " Cost Accounting Standards," set forth in 331.50 of the CASB's regulations shall be inserted in lieu of this clause; or (2) This requirement shall apply only to negotiated subcontracts in excess of $100.000 where the price negotiated is not based on-- (i) Established catalog or market prices of comercial items sold in substantial quantities to the general public; or (ii) Price set by law or regulation. (3) The requirement shall not apply to negotiated subcontracts otherwise exempt from the requirement to include a CAS clause by reason of 331.30(b) of the CASB's regulations. (Endofclause) (R1-3.1204-1(a)(2)) 52.232-9 LIMITATION ON WITHHOLDING OF PAYMENTS. (APR1984) If more than one clause or Schedule term of this contract authorizes the temporary withholding of amounts otherwise payable to the Contractor for supplies delivered or services performed, the total of the amounts withheld at any one time shall not exceed the greatest amount that may be withheld under any one clause or Schedule term at that time; provided, that this limitation shall not apply to-- (a) Withholdings pursuant to any clause relating to wages or hours of employees;
RS-RES-84-128 Page 56 Withholdings not specifically provided for by this contract; The recovery of overpayments; and Any other withholding for which the Contracting Officer determines that this limitation is inappropriate (End of clause) R 7-104.21 1958 SEP R 7-403.12 1959 FEB 52.232-17 INTEREST. (APR1984) (a) Notwithstanding any otner clause of this contract, all amounts that become payable by the Contractor to the Government under this contract (net of any applicable' tax credit under the Internal Revenue Code (26 U.S.C. 1481)) shall bear simple interest from the date due until paid unless paid within 30 days of becoming due. The interest rate shall be the interest rate established by the Secretary of the Treasury as provided in Section 12 of the Contract Disputes Act of 1978 (Public Law 95-563), which is applicable to the period in which the amount becomes due, as provided in paragraph (b) of this clause, and then at the rate applicable for each six-month period as fixed by the Secretary until the amount is paid. (b) Amounts shall be due at the earliest of the following dates: ' (1) The date fixed under this contract. (2) The date of the first written demand for payment co.1sistent with this contract including any demand resulting from a default termination. (3) The date the Government transmits to the Contractor a proposed supplemental agreement to confinn completed negotiations establishing the amount of debt. (4) If this contract provides for revision of prices, the date of written notice to the Contractor stating the amount of refund payable in connection with a pricing proposal or a negotiated pricing agreement not confirmed by contract modification. (c) The interest charge made under this clause may be reduced under the procedures prescribed in 32.614-2 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation in effect on the date of this contract. (End of clause) (R7-104.391972MAY) (R1-7.203-15) 52.232-19 AVAILA81LITY OF FUNDS FOR THE NEXT FISCAL YEAR. (APR1984) Funds are not presently available for performance under this contract beyond...................... . The Government's obligation for performance of this contract beyond that date is contingent upon the availability of appropriated funds from which payment for contract purposes can be made, ho legal liability on the part of the Government for any payment may arise for performance under this contract beyond . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , until funds are made available to the Contracting Officer for performance and until the Contractor receives notice of availability, to be confirmed in writing by the Contracting Officer. (End of clause) (SS7-104.91(b)1975JUN)
RS-RES-84-128 Page 57 52.232-22 LIMITATION OF FUNDS. (ApR1984) (a) The parties estimate that performance of this contract will not cost the Government more than (1) the estimated cost specified in the Schedule or, (2) if this is a cost-sharing contract, the Government's share of the estimated cost specified in the Schedule. The Contractor agrees to use its best efforts to perform the work specified in the . Schedule and all obligations under this contract within the estimated cost, which, if this is a cost-sharing contract, includes both the Government's and the Contractor's share of the cost. (b) The Schedule specifies the amount presently available for payment by the Government and allotted to this contract, the items covered, the Government's share of the cost if this is a cost-sharing contract, and the period cf performance it is estimated the allotted amount will cover. The partie3 contemplate that the Government will allot additional funds incrementally to the contract up to the full estimated cost to the Government specified in the Schedule, exclusive of any fee. The Contractor agrees to perform, or have
- performed, work on the contract up to the point at which the total amount paid and payable by the Government under the contract approximates but does not exceed the total amount actually allotted by the Government to the contract.
(c) The Contractor shall notify the Contracting Officer in writing whenever it has reason to believe that the costs it expects to incur under this centract in the next 60 days, when added to all costs previously incurred, will exceed 75 percent of (1) the total amount so far allotted to the contract by the Government or, (2) if this is a cost-sharing contract, the amount then allotted to the contract by the Government plus the Contractor's corresponding share. The notice shall state the estimated amount of additional funds required to continue performance for the period specified in the Schedule. (d) Sixty days before the end of the period specified in the Schedule, the Contractor shall notify the Contracting Officer in writing of the estimated amount of additional funds, i f any, required to continue timely perfomance under the contract or for any further period specified in the Schedule or otherwise agreed upon, and when the funds will be required. (e) If, after notification, additional funds are not allotted by the end of the period specified in the Schedule or another agreed-upon date, upon the Contractor's written request the Contracting Officer w<ll terminate this contract on that date in accordance with the provisions of the Termination clause of this contract. If the Contractor estimates that the funds available will allow it to contir.ue to discharge its obligations beyond that date, it may specify a later date in its request, and the Contracting Officer may terminate this contract on that later date. (f) Except as required by other provisions of this contract, specifically citing and stated to be an exception to this clause-- (1) The Government is not obligated to reimburse the Contractor for costs incurred in excess of the total amount allotted by the Government to this contract; and (2) The Contractor is not obligated to continue performance under this contract (including actions under the Termination clause of this contract) or otherwise incur costs in excess of (i) the amount then allotted to the contract by the Government or, (ii) if this is a cost-sharing contract, the amount then allotted by the Government to the contract plus the Contractor's corresponding share, until the Contracting Officer notifies the Contractor in writing that the amount allotted by the Government has been increased and specifies an increased amount, which shall then constitute the total amount allotted by the Government to this contract. (g) The estimated cost shall be increased to the extent that (1) the amount allotted by the Government or, (2) if this is a cost-sharing contract, the
RS-RES-84-128 Page 58 amount then allotted by the Government to the contract plus the Contractor's corresponding share, exceeds the estimated cost specified in the Schedule. If this is a cost-sharing contract, the increase shall be allocated in accordance with the formula specified in the Schedule. (h) No notice, comunication, or representation in any form other than that specified in subparagraph (f)(2) above, or from any person other than the Contracting Officer, shall affect the amount allotted by the Government to this contract. In the absence of the specified notice, the Government is not obligated to reimburse the Contractor for any costs in excess of the total amount allotted by the Government to this contract, whether incurred during the course of the contract or as a result of termination. (1) When and to the extent that the amount allotted by the Government to the contract is increased, any costs the Contractor incurs before the increase that are in excess of (1) the amount previously allotted by the Government or, (2) if this is a cost-sharing contract, the amount previously allotted by the Government to the contract plus the Contractor's corresponding share, shall be allowable to the same extent as if incurred afterward, unless the Contracting Officer issues a termination or other notice and directs that the increase is solely)to (j cover termination or other specified expenses. Change orders shall not be co amount allotted by the Government specified in the Schedule, unless they contain a statement increasing the amount allotted. (k) Nothing in this clause shall affect the right of the Government to terminate this contract. If this contract is terminated, the Government and the Contractor shall negotiate an equitable distribution of all property produ:ed or purchased under the contract, based upon the share of costs incurred by each. (1) If the Government does not allot sufficient funds to allow completion of the work, the Contractor is entitled to a percentage of the fee specified in the Schedule equalling the percentage of completion of the work contemplated by this contract. (Endofclause) (R7-203.3(b)19660CT) (R 7-402.2(c) & (d) 1966 0CT) (R 1-7.202-3(b) (R 1-7.402-2(c) & (d)) 52.232-23 ASSIGNMENT OF CLAIMS. (APR 1984) (a) The Contractor, under the Assignment of Claims Act, as amended, 31 U.S.C. 203, 41 U.S.C.15 (hereafter referred to as the "the Act"), may assign its rights to be paid amounts due or to become due as a result of the performance of this contract to a bank, trust company, or other financing institution, including any Federal lending agency. The assignee under such an assignment may thereafter further assign or reassign its right under the original assignment to any type of financing institution described in the preceding sentence. (b) Any assignment or reassignment authorized under the Act and this clause shall cover all unpaid amounts payable under this contract, and shall not be made to more than one party, except that an assignment or reassignment may be made to one party as agent or trustee for two or more parties participating in the financing of this contract. (c) The Contractor shall not furnish or disclose to any assignee under this contract any classified document (including this contract) or information s
RS-RES-84-128 Page 59 related to work under this contract until the Contracting Officer authorizes such action in writing. (End of clause) , (R 7-103.8 1962 FE8; R 1 30.703 1976 MAY) R 7-602.8 1976 OCT R 7-607.6 1976 0CT 52.233-1 DISPUTES. (APR1984) (a)ThiscontractissubjecttotheContractDisputesActof 1978 (41 U.S.C. 601-613) (the Act). (b) Except as provided in the Act, all disputes arising under or relating to this contract shall be resolved under this clause. (c) " Claim," as used in this clause, means a written demand or written assertion by one of the contracting parties seeking, as a matter of right, the payment of money in a sum certain, the adjustment or interpretation of contract terms, or other relief arising under or relating to this contract. A clairn arising under a contract, unlike a claiu relating to that contract, is a claim that can be resolved under a contract clause that provides for the relief sought by the claimant. However, a written demand or written assertion by the Contractor seeking the payment of money exceeding $50,000 is not a claim under the Act until certified as required by subparagraph (d)(2) below. A voucher, invoice, or other routine request for payment that is not in dispute when submitted is not a claim under the Act. The submission may be converted to a claim undir the Act, by complying with the submission and certificat;on requirements of this clause, if it is disputed either as to liability or amount or is not acted upon in a reasonable time. (d) (1) A claim by the Contractor shall be made in writing and submitted to the Contracting Officer for a written decision. A claim by the Government against the Contractor shall be subject to a written decision by the Contre". ting Officer. (2) For Contractor claims exceeding $50,000, the Contractor shall . .bmit with the claim a certification that-- (1))The (ii claim is made in good faith; Supporting data are accurate and com Contractor's knowledge and belief; and (iii) The amount requested accurately reflects the contract adjustment for which the Contractor believes the Government is liable. (3) (1) If the Contractor is an individual, the certification shall be executed by that individual. (11) If the Contractor is not an individual, the certification shall be executed by-- (A) A senior company official in charge at the Contractor's plant or location involved; or (8) An officer or general partner of the Contractor having overall responsibility for the conduct of the Contractor's affairs. (e) For Contractor claims of $50,000 or less, the Contracting Officer must, if requested in writing by the Contractor, render a decision.within 60 days'of the request. For Contractor-certified claims over $50,000, the Contracting Officer r.ust, within 60 days, decide the claim or notify the Contractor of the date by which the decision will be made. (f) The Contracting Officer's decision shall be final unless the Contractor . appeals or files a suit as provided in the Act. l l l
RS-RES-84-128 Page 60 ~ (g) The Government shall pay interest on the amount found due and unpaid from (1) the date the Contracting Officer receives the claim (properly certified if required), or (2) the date payment othemise 'would be due, if that date is
. later, until the date of payment. Simple interest on claims shall be paid at the rate, fixed by the Secretary of the Treasury as provided in the Act, which is applicable to the period during which the Contracting Officer receives the claim and then at the rate applicable for each 6-month period as fixed by the Treasury Secretary during the sendency of the claim.
(h) The Contr:ctor shall proceed diligently with perfomance of this contract, pending final resolution of any request for relief, claim, appeal, or action arising under the contract, and comply with any decision of the Contracting Officer. (End of clause) (R 7-103.12 1980 JUN) (R FPR Temporary Regulation 55-!!1980JUN) 52.237-3 CONTINUITY OF SERVICES. (APR 1984) (a) The Contractor recognizes that the services under this contract are vital to the Government and must be continued without interruption and that, upon contract expi ra tion , a successor, either the Government or another contractor, may continue them. The Contractor agrees to (1) furnish phase-in training and (2) exercise its best efforts and cooperation to effect an orderly and efficient transition to a successor. (b) The Contractor shall, upon the Contracting Officer's written notico, (1) furnish phase-in, phase-out services for up to 60 days after this contract expires and (2) negotiate in good faith a plan with a successor to determine the nature and extent of phase-in, phase-out services required. The plan shall specify a training program and a date for transferring responsibilities for each division of work described in the plan, and shall be subject to the Contracting Officer's approval. The Contractor shall provide sufficient experienced personnel during the phase-in, phase-out period to ensure that the services called for by this contract are maintained at the required level of proficiency. (c) The Contractor shall allow as many personnel as practicable to remain on the job to help the successor maintain the continuity and consistency of the services required by this contract. The Contractor also shall disclose necessary personnel records and allow the successor to conduct onsite interviews with these employees. If selected employees are agreeable to the change, the Contractor shall release them at a mutually agreeable date and negotiate transfer of their earned fringe benefits to the successor. (d) The Contractor shall be reimbursed for all reasonable phase-in, phase-out costs (i.e., costs incurred within the agreed period after contract expiration that result from phase-in, phase-out operations) and a fee (profit) not to exceed a pro rata portion of the fee (profit) under this contract. (End of clause) (R7-1910.3JUL1976) 52.242-1 NOTICE OF INTENT TO DISALLOW COSTS. (APR1984) (a)Notwithstandinganyotherclauseofthiscontract-- (1) The Contracting Officer may at any time issue to the Contractor a written notice of intent to disallow specified costs incurred or planned for incurrence under this contract that have been determined not to be allowable under the contract terms; and e
RS-RES-84-128 Page 61 (2) The Contractor may, after receiving a notice under subparagraph (1) above, submit a written response to the Contracting Officer, with justification for allowance of the costs. If the Contractor does respond within 60 days, the Contracting Officer shall, within 60 days of receiving the response, either make a written withdrawal of the notice or issue a written decision. (b) Failure to issue a notice under this Notice of Intent to Disallow Costs clause shall not affect the Government's rights to take exception to incurred costs. (End of clause) (R7-203.351978AUG) 52.242-2 PRODUCTION PROGRESS REPORTS. (APR 1984) (a) The Contractor shall prepare and submit to the Contracting Officer the production progress reports specified in the contract Schedule. (b) During any delay in furnishing a production progress report required under this contract, the Contracting Officer may withhold from payment an amount not exceeding $10,000 or 5 percent of the amount of this contract, whichever is less. (End of clause) (R7-104.511971ApR) 52.243-2 CHANGES--COST-REIMBURSEMENT. (APR1984) (a) The Contracting Officer may at any time, by written order, and without notice to the sureties, if any, make changes within the general scope of this contract in any one or more of the following: (1) Drawings, designs, or specifications when the supplies to be furnished are to be specially manufactured for the Government in accordance with the drawings, designs, or specifications. 2'i Method of shipment or packing.
- 3) Place of delivery.
(b) f any such change causes an increase or decrease in the estimated cost of, or the time required for, performance of any part of the work under this contract, whether or not changed by the order, or otherwise affects any other terms and conditions of this contract, the Contracting Officer shall make an equitable adjustment in the (1) estimated cost, delivery or completion schedule, or both; (2) amount of any fixed fee; and (3) other affected terms and shall modify)the (c Thecontract accordingly. Contractor must submit any " proposal for adjustment" (hereafter referred to as proposal) under this clause within 30 days from the date of receipt of the written order. However, if the Contracting Officer decides that the facts justify it, the Contracting Officer may receive and act upon a proposal submitted before final payment of the contract. (d) Failure to agree to any adjustment shall be a dispute under the Disputes clause. However, nothing in this clause shall excuse the Contractor from proceeding with the contract as changed. (e) Notwithstanding the terms and conditions of paragraphs (a) and (b) above, the estimated cost of this contract and, if this contract is incrementally funded, the funds allotted for the performance of this contract, shall not be increased or considered to be increased except by specific written modification of the contract indicating the new contract estimated cost and, if this contract is incrementally funded, the new amount allotted to the contract.
r-RS-RES-84-128 Page 62 Until this modification is made, the Contractor shall not be obligated to continue performance or incur costs beyond the point established in the Limitation of Cost or Limitation of Funds clause of this contract. Alternate !. (APR 1984). If the requirement is for services and no supplies are to be furnished, substitute the following paragraph (a) for paragraph (a) of the basic clause: (a) The Contracting Officer may at any time, by written order, and without notice to the sureties, if any, make changes within the general scope of this contract in any one or more of the following: (1) Description of services to be perforir.ed. (2) Time of performance (i.e., hours of the day, days of the week, (3) Place of performance of the services. (End of clause) (R7-203.21967APR) (R1-7.202-2) (R 7-1909.2 1971 NOV) 52.244-2 SU8 CONTRACTS,UNDER COST-REIM8URSEMENT AND LETTER CONTRACTS. (APR1984) (a) " Subcontract," as used in this clause, includes but is not limited to purchase orders, and changes and modifications to purchase orders. The Contractor shall notify the Contracting Officer reasonably in advance of entering into any subcontract if-- (1) The proposed subcontract is of the cost-reimbursement, time-and-materials, or labor-hour type; (2) The proposed subcontract is fixed-price and exceeds either $25,000 or 5 percent of the total estimated cost of this contract; (3) The proposed subcontract has experimental, developmental, or research work as one of its purposes; or (4) This contract is not a facilities contract and the proposed subcontract provides for the fabrication, purchase, rental, installation, or other acquisition of special test squipment valued in excess of $10,000 or of any items of industrial facilities. (b) (1) In the case of a proposed subcontract that (1) is of the cost-reimbursement, time-and-materials, or labor-hour type and is estimated to exceed
$10,000, including any fee, (ii) is proposed to exceed $100,000, or (iii) is one of a number of subcontracts with a single subcontractor, under this contract, for the same or related supplies or services that, in the aggregate, are expected to exceed $100,000, the advance notification required by paragraph (a) above shall include the inforenation specified in subparagraph (2) below.
(2) A description of the supplies or services to be subcontracted.
) Identification of the type of subcontract to be used, iii) Identification of the proposed subcontractor and an explanation of why and how the proposed subcontractor was selected, including the competition obtained.
(iv) The proposed subcontract price and the Contractor's cost or price analysis. e e
RS-RES-84-128 Page 63 (v) The subcontractor's current, complete, and accurate cost or pricing data and Certificate of Current Cost or Pricing Data, if required by other contract provisions. (vi) The subcontractor's Olsclosure Statement or Certificate relating to Cost Accounting Standards when such data are required by other provisions of this contract. (vii) A negotiation memorandum reflecting-- (A) The principal elements of the subcontract price negotiations; (B) The most significant considerations controlling establishment of initial or revised prices; (C) The reason cost or pricing data were or were not required; (0) The extent, if any, to which the Contractor did not rely on the subcontractor's cost or pricing data in determining the price objective and in negotiating (the final price;E) The extent to which it was recognized in the negoti that the subcontractor's cost or pricing data were not accurate, complete, or current; the action taken by the Contractor and the subcontractor; and the effect of any such defective data on the total price negotiated; (F) The reasons for any significant difference between the Contractor's price objective and the price negotiated; and (G)Acompleteexplanationoftheincentivefeeorprofitplan when incentives are used. The explanation shall identify each critical performance element, management decisions used to quantify each incentive element, reasons for the incentives, and a sunnary of all trade-off possibilities considered. (c) The Contractor shall obtain the Contracting Officer's written consent before placing any subcontract for which advance notification is required under paragraph (a) above. However, the Contracting Officer may ratify in writing any such subcontract. Ratification shall constitute the consent of the Contracting Officer. (d) If the Contractor has an approved purchasing system and the subcontract is within the scope of such approval, the Contractor may enter into the subcontracts described in subparagraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2) above without the consent of the Contracting Officer, unless this contract is for the acquisition of major systems, subsystems, or their components. (e) Even if the Contractor's purchasing system has been approved, the Contractor shall obtain the Contracting Officer's written consent before placing subcontracts that have been selected for special surveillance and identified in the Schedule of this contract. (f) Unless the consent or approval specifically provides otherwise, neither consent by the Contracting Officer to any subcontract nor approval of the Contractor's purchasing system shall constitute a deterimination (1) of the acceptability of any subcontract terms or conditions, (2) of the allowability of any cost under this contract, or (3) to relieve the Contractor of any responsibility for performing this contract. (g) No subcontract placed under this contract shall provide for payment on a cost-plus-a-percentage-of-cost basis, and any fee payable under cost-reimbursement type subcontracts shall not exceed the fee limitations in subsection 16.301 4 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR). (h) The Contractor shall give the Contracting Officer immediate written notice of any action or suit filed and prompt notice of any claim made against the Contractor by any subcontractor or vendor that, in the opinion of the Contractor, may result in litigation related in any way to this contract, with
l RS-RES-84-128 Page 64 respect to which the Contractor may be entitled to reimbursement f rom the l Government. (1) (1) The Contractor shall insert in each price redetermination or incentive price revision subcontract under this contract the substance of the l paragraph " Quarterly limitation on payments statement" of the clause at 52.216- ! 5 Price Redetermination--Prospective. 52.216-6, Price Redetemination-- l Retroactive. 52.216-16 Incentive Price Revision--Firm Target, or 52.216-17 1 Incentive Price Revision-- Successive Targets, as appropriate, modified in accordance with the paragraph entitled " Subcontracts" of that clause. (2) Additionally, the Contractor shall include in each cost. i reimbursement subcontract under this contract a requirement that the I ! subcontractor insert the substance of the appropriate modified subparagraph referred to in subparagraph (1) above in each lower tier price redetemination , or incentive price revision subcontract under that subcontract. (j) To facilitate small business participation in subcontracting, the i Contractor agrees to provide progress payments on subcontracts under this t contract that are fixed-price subcontracts with small business concerns in conformity with the standards for customary progress payments stated in FAR 32.502-1 and 32.504(f), as in effect on the date of this contract. The Contractor further agrees that the need for such progress payments will not be considered a handicap or adverse factor in the award of subcontracts. (k) The Government reserves the right to review the Contractor's purchasing system as set forth in FAR Subpart 44.3. , (Endofclause) l l (R7-402.8(a) (R 7-203.8(a) and b land1982 DEC) ((bll 1982 DEC) fR7-605.23llI (R 7-702.33 R 7-703.25 l l i(R 7-1703.5l)l (R7-1909.7 I,R 1-7.202-8) l (R 1-7.402-8(a) and (c ) R 7-702.33 1977 APR R 7-703.25 1977 APR 52.244-5 COMPETITION IN SUBCONTRACTING. (APR1984) The Contractor 'shall select subcontractors (including suppliers) on a competitive basis to the maximum practical extent consistent with the objectives and requirements of the contract. l (Endofclause) (V7-104.401962APR) (V 1-7.202-30) V 7-303.27 Y 7-402.29 ' V 7-603.18 l V 7-605.37 l V 7-702.50 V 7-703.43 V 7-704.35 V 7-1703.5 V 7-1903.28 V 7-1909.23 8 8 . . ,
-. -- , _ - . v,.._-- _..__...m,- _ _ , _ _ , _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ __
RS-RES-84-128 Page 65 52.245-5 GOVERNMENT PROPERTY fCOST-REIMBURSEMENT, TIME-AND-MATERIAL, OR LABOR-HOUR CONTRACTS). (APR1984) (a) Government-furnished property. (1) The term " Contractor's managerial perNnnel," as used in pa ragraph (g) of this clause, means any of the Cuntractor's directors, officers, managers, superintendents, or equivalent representatives who have supervision or direction of-- (1))All (ii Allororsubstantially substantiallyall allof of the the Contractor's Contractor's business; operation at any one plant, or separate location at which the contract is being performed; or (iii) A separate and complete major industrial operation connected with performing this contract. (2) The Government shall deliver to the Contractor, for use in connection with and under the terms of this contract, the Government-furnished property described in the Schedule or specifications, together with such related data and information as the Contractor may request and as may be reasonably required for the intended use of the property (hereinaf ter referred to as
" Government-furnished property").
(3) The delivery or performance dates for this contract are based upon the expectation that Government-furnished property suitable for use will be delivered to the Contractor at the times stated in the Schedule or, if not so , stated, in sufficient time to enable the Contractor to meet the contract's delivery (or performance dates.4) If Government-furnished property is received by the C condition not suitable for the intended use, the Contractor shall, upon receipt, notify the Contracting Officer, detailing the facts, and, as directed by the Contracting Officer and at Government expense, either effect repairs or modification or return or otherwise dispose of the property. After completing the directed action and upon written request of the Contractor, the Contracting Officer shall make an equitable adjustment as provided in paragraph (h) of this clause. (5) If Government-furnished property is not delivered to the Contractor by the required time or times, the Contracting Officer shall, upon the Contractor's timely written request, make a determination of the delay, if any, caused the Contractor and shall make an equitable adjustment in accordance with paragraph (h) of this clause. (b) Changes in Government-furnished property. (1) The Contracting Officer may, by written notice (1) decrease the Government-furnished property provided or to be provided under this contract or (ii) substitute other Government-furnished property for the property to be provided by the Government or to be acquired by the Contractor for the Government under this contract. The Contractor shall prematly take such action as the Contracting Officer may direct regarding the removal , shipment, or disposal of the property covered by this notice. (2) Upon the Contractor's written request, the Contracting Officer shall make an equitable adjustment to the contract in accordance with paragraph (h) of this clause, if the Government has agreed in the Schedule to make such property available for performing this contract and there is any-- ( Decrease or substitution in this property pursuant to subparagraph )(1) above; or ( ) Withdrawal of authority to use property, if provided under any other contract or lease. (c) Title. (1) The Government shall retain title to all Government-furnished property.
RS-RES-84-128 page 66 (2) Title tu all property purchased by the Contractor for which the Contractor is entitled to be reimbursed as a direct item of cost under this contract shall pass to and vest in the Government upon the vendor's delivery of such property. - (3) Title to all other property, the cost of which is reimbursable to the Contractor shall pass to and vest in the Government upon-- (i Issuance of the property for use in contract performance; (1 ) Commencement of processing of the property or use in contract performance; or (iii) Reimbursement of the cost of the property by the Government, whichever occurs first. (4) All Government-furnished property and all property acquired by the Contractor, title to which vests in the Government under this paragraph (collectively referred to as "66ernment property"), are subject to the provisions of this clause. Title to Government property shall not be affected by its incorporation into or attachment to any property not owned by the Government, nor shall Government property become a fixture or lose its identity as personal property by being attached to any real property. (d) Use of Government property. The Government property shall be used only for perfonning this contract, unless otherwise proviced in this contract or approved by the Contracting Officer. (c) property administration. (1) The Contractor shall be responsible and accountable for all Government property provided under this contract and shall comply with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Subpart 45.5, as in effect on the date of this contract, and which is hereby incorporated into this contract by reference. (2) The Contractor shall establish and maintain a program for the use, maintenance, repair, protection, and preservation of Government property in accordance with sound business practice and the applicable provisions of FAR Subpart 45.5. (3) If damage occurs to Government property, the risk of which has been assumed by the Government under this contract, the Government shall replace the items or the Contractor shall make such repairs as the Government directs. However, if the Contractor cannot effect such repairs within the time required, the Contractor shall dispose of the property as directed by the Contracting Officer. When any property for which the Government is responsible is replaced or repaired, the Contractin in accordance with paragraph (h)g Officer of this shall make an equitable adjustment clause. (f) Access. The Government and all its designees shall have access at all reasonable times to the premises in which any Government property is located for the purpose of inspecting the Government property. (g) Limited risk of loss. (1) The Contractor shall not be liable for loss or destruction of, or damage to, the Government property provided under this contract or for expenses incidental to such loss, destruction, or damage, except as provided in subparagraphs (2) and (3) below. (2) The Contractor shall be responsible for loss or destruction of, or damage to, the Government property provided under this contract (including expenses incidental to such loss, destruction, or damage)-- (1) That results from a risk expressly required to be insured under this contract, but only to the extent of the insurance required to be purchased and maintained or to the extent of insurance actually purchased and maintained, whichever is greater;
RS-RES-84-128 Page 67 (11) That results from a risk that is in fact covered by insurance or for which the Contractor is otherwise reimbursed, but only to the extent of such insurance or reimbursement; (iii) For which the Contractor is otherwise responsible under the express terms of this contract; (iv) That results from willful misconduct or lack of good faith on the part of the Contractor's managerial personnel; or (v) That results from a failure on the part of the Contractor, due to willful misconduct or lack of good faith on the part of the Contractor's managerial personnel, to establish and administer a program or system for the control, use, protection, preservation, maintenance, and repair of Government property3) (as(1)required by paragraph If the Contractor fails(e) toofact this asclause. provided by subdivision (g)(2)(v) above, after being notified (by certified mail addressed to one of the Contractor's managerial personnel) of the Government's disapproval, withdrawal of approval, or nonacceptance of the system or program, it shall be conclusively presumed that such failure was due to willful misconduct or lack of good faith on the part of the Contractor's managerial personnel. (ii) in such event, any loss or destruction of, or damage to, the Government property shall be presumed to have resulted from such failure unless the Contractor can establish by clear and convincing evidence that such loss, , destruction, or damage-- (A) Did not result from the Contractor's failure to maintain an approved program or system; or (B) Occurred while an approved program or system was maintained by the Contractor. (4) If the Contractor transfers Government property to the possession and control of a subcontractor, the transfer shall not affect the liability of the Contractor for loss or destruction of, or daniage to, the property as set forth above. However, the Contractor shall require the subcontractor to assume the risk of, and be responsible for, any loss or destruction of, or damage to, the property while in the subcontractor's possession or control, except to the - extent that the subcontract, with the advance approval of the Contracting Officer, relieves the subcontractor from such liability. In the absence of such approval, the subcontract shall contain appropriate provisions requiring the return of all Government property in as good condition as when received, except for reasonaole wear and tear or for its use in accordance with the provisions of the prime contract. (5) Upon loss or destruction of, or damage to, Government property provided under this contract, the Contractor shall so notify the Contracting Officer and shall communicate with the loss and salvage crganization, if any, designated by the Contracting Officer. With the assistance of any such crganization, the Contractor shall take all reasonable action to protect the dovernment property from further damage, separate the damaged and undamaged Government property, put all the affected Government property in the best possible order, and furnish to the Contracting Officer a statement of-- 1))The 11 Thelost, timedestroyed, and origin of orthe damaged Government loss, destruction, property; or damage; 111) All known interests in comingled property of which the Government property is a part; and (iv) The insurance, if any, covering any part of or interest in such commingled property. (6) The Contractor shall repair, renovate, and take such other action with respect to damaged Government property as the Contracting Officer directs.
RS-RES-84-128 Page 68 If the Government property is destroyed or damaged beyond practical repair, or is damaged and so comingled or combined with property of others (including the Contractor's) that ' separation is impractical, the Contractor may, with the approval of and subject to any conditions imposed by the Contracting Officer, ' sell such property for the account of the Government. Such sales may be made in order to minimize the loss to the Government, to permit the resumption of business, or to accomplish a similar purpose. The Contractor shall be entitled to an equitable adjustment in the contract price for the expenditures made in the obligations under this subparagraph (g)(6) in accordance with performing paragraph (h) of this clause. However, the Government may directly reimburse e the loss and salvage organization for any of their charges. The Contracting Officer shall give due regard to the Contractor's liability under this paragraph (g) when making any such equitable adjustment. (7) The Contractor shall not be reimbursed for, and shall not include as an item of overhead, the cost of insurance or of any reserve covering risk of loss or destruction of, or damage to, Government property, except to the extent , that the Government may have expressly required the Contractor to carry such insurance under another provision of this contract. (8) In the event thh Contractor is reimbursed or otherwise compensated i
-for any. loss or destruction of, or damage to, Government property, the Contractor shall use the proceeds to repair, renovate, or replace the lost, destroyed, or damaged Government property or shall otherwise credit the proceeds to, or equitably reimburse, the Government, as directed by the Contracting ,
Officer. (9) The Contractor shall do nothing to prejudice the Government's rights to recover against third parties for any loss or destruction of, or damage to, Government property. Upon the request of the Contracting Officer, the Contractor shall, at the Government's expense, furnish to the Government all reasonable assistance and cooperation (including the prosecution of suit and the execution of instruments of assignraent in favor of the Government) in obtaining recovery. .In addition, where a subcontractor has not been relieved from liability for any loss or destruction of, or damage to, Government property, the l Contractor shall enforce for the benefit of the Government the liability of the subcontractor for such loss, destruction, or damage. l (h) Equitable adjustment. When this clause specifies an equitable l adjustment, it shall be made to any affected centract provision in accordance with the procedures of the Changes clause. When appropriate, the Contracting Officer may initiate an equitable. adjustment in favor of the Government. The right to an equitable adjustment shall be the Contractor's exclusive remedy. The Government shall not be liable to suit for breach of contract for-- (1) Any delay in delivery of Government-furnished property; (2) Delivery of Government-furnished property in a condition not suitable for its intended use; (3) A decrease in or substi.tution of Government-furnished property; or (4) Failure to repair or replace Government property for which the
. Government is responsible. .
l (1) Final accounting and disposition of Government property. Upon completing this contract, or at such earlier dates as may be fixed by the Contracting Officer, the Contractor shall submit, in a form acceptable to the Contracting Officer, inventory schedules covering all items of Government . property not consumed in performing this contract or delivered to the ! Government. The Contractor shall- prepare for shipment, deliver f.o.b. origin, or dispose of the Government property as may be directed or authorized by the Contracting Officer. The net proceeds of any such disposal shall be credited to l '
- t
RS-RES-84-128 Page 69 the cost of the work covered by this contract or paid to the Government as directed by the Contracting Officer. The foregoing provisions shall apply to scrap from Government property; provided, however, that the Contracting Officer may authorize or direct the Contractor to omit from such inventory schedules any scrap consisting of faulty castings or forgings or of cutting and processing waste, such as chips, cuttings, borings, turnings, short ends, ci rcles , trimings, clippings, and remnants, and to dispose of such scrap in accordance with the Contractor's normal practice and account for it as a part of general overhead or other reimbursable costs in accordance with the Contractor's established accounting procedures. (j) Abandonment and restoration of Contractor premises. Unless otherwise , provided herein, the Government-- l (1) May abandon any Government property in place, at which time all obligations of the Government regarding such abandoned property shall cease; and (2) Has no obligation to restore or rehabilitate the Contractor's premises under any circumstances (e.g., abandonment, disposition upon completion of need, or contract completion). However, if the Government- furnished property (listed in the Schedule or specifications) is withdrawn or is unsuitable for the intended use, or if other Government property is substituted, ! then the equitable adjustment under paragraph (h) of this clause may properly
- include restoration or rehabilitation costs.
l (k) Communications. All , communications under this clause shall be in writing. (1) Overseas contracts. If this contract is to be performed outside the l United States of America, its territories, or possessions, the words
" Government" and " Gov 3rnment-furnished" (wherever they appear in this clause) shall be construed as " United States Government" and " United States Government-furnisned," respectively.
l (End of clause) 1 (R 7-203.21 1970 SEP) l (R 7-402.25, except clause paragraph (c) 1972 SEP) l. (R 7-901'.5 1970 SEP) (R 1-7.203-21(a)) ,, (R 1-7.402-25(a)) l (R 1-7.402-25(b), except clause paragraph (c)) 52.246-25 LIMITATION OF LIABILITY--SERVICES. (APR 1984) i (a) Except as p'rovided in paragraphs (b) and (c) below, and except to the l extent that the Contractor is expressly responsible under this contract for deficiencies in the services required to be performed under it (including any materials furnished in conjunction with those services), the Contractor shall not be liable for loss of or damage to property of the Government that (1) I occurs after Government acceptance of services performed under this contract and (2) results from any defects or deficiencies in the services performed or materials furnished. (b) The limitation of liability under paragraph (a) above shall not apply when a defect or deficiency in, or the Government's acceptance of, services performed or materials furnished results from willful misconduct or lack of good faith on the part of any, of the Contractor's managerial personnel. The term "Contracto r's managerial personnel," as used in this clause, means the Contractor's di rectors , officers, and any of the Contractor's managers, superintendents, or, equivalent representatives who have supervision or direction of-- l l
RS-RES-84-128 Page 70 (1) All or substantially all of th'e Contractor's business; (2) All or substantially all of the Contractor's- operations at any one plant, laboratory, .or separate location at which the contract is being performed; or (3) A separate and complete major industrial operation connected with
.the performance of this contract.
(c) If the Contractor carries insurance, or has established a reserve for self-insurance, covering liability for loss or damage suffered by the Government through the Contractor's performance of services or furnishing of materials under this contract, the Contractor shall be liable to the Government, to the extent of such insurance or reserve, for loss of or damage to property of the Government occurring after Government acceptance of, and resulting from any defects and deficiencies in, services performed or materials furnished under this contract. (d) The Contractor shall include this clause, including this paragraph (d), - supplemented as necessary to reflect the relationship of the contracting parties, in all subcontracts over $25,000. (End of clause) (R 7-1912 1974 APR) 52.247-63 PREFERENCE FOR U.S.-FLAG AIR CARRIERS. (APR 1984) (a) " International air transportation," as used in this clause, means transportation by air between a place in the United States and a place outside the United States or between two places both of which are outside the United
- States.
_ " United States," as used in this cla'use, means the 50 States, the District of' Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and possessions of the United States.
"U.S.-flag air carrier," as used in this clause, means an air carrier holding a certificate under section 401 of the Federal Aviation Act of 1958 (49 U.S.C. 1371).
(b) Section 5 of the International Air Transportation Fair Competitive Practices Act of 1974 (49 U.S.C. 1517) (Fly America Act) requires that all l Federal agencies and Government contractors and subcontractors use. U.S.-flag air carriers for U.S. Government-financed international air transportation of t personnel (and their personal effects) or property, to the extent that service by those carriers is available. It requires the Comptroller General of the United States, in the absence of satisfactory proof of the necessity for foreign-flag air transportation, to disallow expenditures from funds, appropriated or otherwise established for the account of the United States, for international air transportation secured aboard a foreign-flag air carrier if a U.S.-flag air carrier is available to provide such services. (c) The Contractor agrees, in performing work under this contract, to use U.S.-flag air carriers for international air transportation of personnel (and their personal effects) or property to the extent that service by those carriers is available. (d) In the event that the Contractor selects a carrier other than a U.S.- flag air carrier for international air transportation, the Contractor shall include a certification on vouchers involving such transportation essentially as
- follows!
l CERTIFICATION OF UNAVAILABILITY OF U.S.-FLAG AIR CARRIERS l I hereby certify that international air transportation of persons (and their personal effects) or property by U.S.-flag air carrier was not available or it l l l.
RS-RES-84-128 Page 71 was necessary to use foreign-flag air carrier service for the following reasons (see section 47.403. of the Federal Acquisition Regulation): [ State reasons]:
............................g.g..g.g.g... .
(e) The Contractor shall include the substance of this clause, including i this paragraph.(e), in each subcontract or purchase under this contract that may ! involve international air transportation. (End of clause)
, (R 7-104.95 1979 NOV)
(R 1-1.323-2) 52.249-6 TERMINATION (C0ST-REIMBURSEMENT). (APR1984) (a) The Government may tenninate performance of work under this contract in whole or, from time to time, in part, if-- (1) The Contracting Officer determines that a termination is in the Government's interest; or (2) The Contractor defaults in performing this contract and fails to cure the default within 10 days (unless extended by the Contracting Officer) after receiving a notice specifying the default. " Default" includes failure to make progress in the work so as to endanger perfonnance. (b) The Contracting Officer shall terminate by delivering to the Contractor a Notice of Termination specifying whether tennination is for default of the Contractor or for convenience of the Government, the extent of termination, and the effective date. If, after termir.c. tion for default, it is determined that the Contractor was not in default or that the Contractor's failure to perform or to make progress in performance is.due to causes beyond the control and without the fault or negligence of the Contractor as set forth in the Excusable Delays 1 clause,' the rights and obligations of the parties will be the same as -if the termination was for the convenience of the Government. (c) After receipt of a Notice of Termination, and except as directed by the Contracting Officer, the Contractor shall immediately proceed with the following obligations, regardless of any' delay in determining or adjusting any_ amounts due under this clause: (1) Stop work as specified in the notice. (2) Place no further subcontracts or orders (referred to as subcontracts in this ~ clause), except as necessary to . complete the continued portion of the
. contract.
(3) Terminate all subcontracts to the extent they relate to the work terminated. (4) Assign to the Government, as directed by the Contracting Officer, all right, ti tle , and interest of the Contractor under the subcontracts terminated, in which case the Government shall have the right to settle or to pay any termination settlement proposal arising out of those terminations. - l (5) With approval or ratification to the extent required by the-
- Contracting Officer, settle all outstanding liabilities and termination settlement proposals arising from the termination of subcontracts, the cost of which would be reimbursable in whole or in part, under this contract; approval or ratification will be final for purposes of this clause.
l (6) Transfer title (if not already transferred) and, as directed by the Contracting Officer, deliver to the Government (i) the fabricated or unfabricated parts, work in process, completed work, supplies, and other material produced or acquired for the work terminated, (ii) the completed or l l
--.-.. ..-._.- _ , -.-.c_ - . - - - , . - ,
RS-RES-84-128 Page 72 4 partially completed plans, drawings, information, and other property that, if the contract had been completed, would be required to be furnished to the Government, and (iii) the jigs, dies, fixtures, and other special tools and
- tooling acquired or manufactured for this contract, the cost of which the i Contractor has been or will be reimbursed under this contract.
! (7)Completeperformanceoftheworknotterminated. (8) Take any action that may be necessary, or that the Contracting Officer may direct, for the protection and preservation of the property related to this contract that is in the possession of the Contractor and in which the Government has or may acquire an interest. (9) Use its best efforts to sell, as directed or authorized by the
- Contracting Officer, any. property of the types referred to in subparagraph (6) above; provided, however, that the Contractor (1) is not required to extend credit to any purchaser and (ii) may acquire the property under the conditions prescribed by, and at prices approved by, the Contracting Officer. The proceeds of any transfer or disposition will be applied to reduce any payments to be made by the Government under this contract, credited to the price or cost of the l work, or paid in any other manner directed by the Contracting Officer.
(d) After expiration of the plant clearance period as defined in Subpart 45.6 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation, the Contractor may submit to the Contracting Officer a list, certified as to quantity and quality, of te mination inventory not previously disposed of, excluding items authorized for disposition by the Contracting Officer. The Contractor may request the Government .o remove those items or enter into an agreement for their storage. Within 15 cays, the i Covernment will accept the items and remove them or enter into a storage agreement. The Contracting Officer may verify the list upon removal of the items, or if stored, within 45 days from submission of the list, and shall correct the list, as necessary, before final settlement. (e) After termination, the Contractor shall submit a final termination settlement proposal to the Contracting Officer in the form and with the certification prescribed by the Contracting Officer. The Contractor shall ' submit the proposal promptly, but no later than 1 year from the effective date of termination, unless extended in writing by the Contracting Officer upon written request of the Contractor within this 1-year period. However, if the Contracting Officer determines that the facts justify it, a termination settlement proposal may be received and acted on after 1 year or any extension. If the Contractor fails to submit the proposal within the time allowed, the Contracting Officer may determine, on the basis of information available, the amount, if any, due the Contractor because of the termination and shall pay the , amount determined. (f) Subject to paragraph (e) above, the Contractor and the Contracting Officer may agree on the whole or any part of the amount to be paid (including an allowance -for fee) because of the termination. The contract shall be amended, and the Contractor paid the agreed amount. - (g) If the Contractor and the Contracting Officer fail to agree in whole or in part on the amount of costs and/or fee to be paid because of the termination of work, the Contracting Officer shall determine, on the basis of information available, the amount, if any, due the Contractor, and shall pay that amount, which sha.ll include the following: (1) All costs reimbursable under this contract, not previously paid, for the performance of this contract before the effective date of the termination, .! and part of those costs that may continue for a reasonable time with the approval of or as directed by the Contracting Officer; however, the Contractor shall discontinue those costs as rapidly as practicable. 4 9 e l
, . .. . .%, _,,-----.--.,--__-.,-m, -
-,.-,_,--,.-.__,...,-.s - , , , , . , - . - - - - , .,,__y _--,,.,.,-.,w,- -3 ----,.-,-,.r gg.-- -- -, -
y--+
RS-RES-84-128 Page 73 (2) The cost of settling and paying termination settlement proposals under terminated subcontracts that are properly chargeable to the terminated portion of the contract if not included in subparagraph (1) above. (3) The reasonable costs of settlement of the work terminated, including-- (i) Accounting, legal, clerical , and other expenses reasonably necessary for the preparation of termination settlement proposals and supporting data; (ii) The termination and settlement of subcontracts (excluding the amounts of such settlements); and (iii) Storage, transportation, and other costs incurred, reasonably necessary for the preservation, protection, or disposition of the termination inventory. If the termination is for default, no amounts "or the preparation of the Contractor's tennination settlement proposal may be included. (4) A portion of the fee payable under the contract, determined as follows: (1) If the contract is terminated for the convenience of the Government, the settlement shall include a percentage of the fee equal to the percentage of completion of work contemplated under the contract, but excluding subcontract effort included in subcontractors ' termination proposals, less previous payments for fee. (ii) If the contract is terminated for default, the total fee payable shall be such proportionate part of the fee as the total number of articles (or amount of services) delivered to and accepted by the Government is to the total number of articles (or amount of services) of a like kind required by the contract. (5) If the settlement includes only fee, it will be determined under subparagraph (g)(4) above. (h) The cost principles and procedures in Part 31 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation, in effect on the date of. this contract, shall govern all costs claimed, agreed to, or determined under this clause. (i) The Contractor shall have the right of appeal, under the Disputes clause, from any determination made by the Contracting Officer under paragraph (e) or (g) above or paragraph (k) below, except that if the Contractor failed to submit the termination settlement proposal within the time provided in paragraph (e) and failed to request a time extension, there is no right of appeal. If the Contracting Officer has made a determination of the amount due under paragraph (e), (g) or (k), the Government shall pay the Contractor (1) the amount determined by the Contracting Officer if there is no right of appeal or if no timely appeal has been taken, or (2) the amount finally determined on an appeal. (j) In arriving at the amount due the Contractor under this clause, there shall be deducted--
.(1) All unliquidated advance or other payments to the Contractor, under tiie terminated portion of this contract; (2) Any claim which the Government has against the Contractor under this contract; and (3) The agreed price for, or the proceeds of sale of materials, supplies, or other things acquired by the Contractor or sold under this clause and not recovered by or credited to the Government.
(k) The Contractor and Contracting Officer must agree to any equitable adjustment in fee for the continued portion of the contract when there is a partial termination. The Contracting Officer shall amend the contract to reflect the agreement.
RS-RES-84-128 Page 74 (1) (1) The Government may, under the terms and conditions it prescribes, make partial payments and payments against costs incurred by the Contractor for the terminated portion of the contract, if the Contracting Officer believes the total of these payments will not exceed the amount to which the Contractor will be entitled. (2) If the total payments exceed the amount finally determined to be due, the Contractor shall repay the excess to the Government upon demand, together with interest computed at the rate established by the Secretary of the Treasury under 50 U.S.C. App. 1215(b)(2). Interest shall be computed for the period from the date the excess payment is received by the Contractor to the date the excess is repaid. Interest shall not be charged on any excess payment due to a reduction in the Contractor's termination settlement proposal because of retention or other disposition of termination inventory until 10 days after the date of the retention or disposition, or a later date determined by the Contracting Officer because of the circumstances. (m) The provisions of this clause relating to fee are inapplicable if this contract does not include a fee. (End of clause) (R 1-8.702) (R 7-203.10 1973 APR) 52.249-14 EXCUSABLE DELAYS. (APR 1984) (a) Except for defaults of subcontractors at any tier, the Contractor shall not be in default because of any failure to perform this contract under its terms if the failure arises from causes beyond the control and without the fault or negligence of the Contractor. Examples of these causes are (1) acts of God or of the public enemy, (2) acts of the Government in either its sovereign or contractual capacity, (3) fires, (4) floods, (5) epidemics, (6) quarantine restrictions, (7) strikes, (8) freight embargoes, and (9) unusually severe weather. In each instance, the failure to perform must be beyond the control and without the fault or negligence of the Contractor. " Default" includes failure to make progress in the work so as to endanger perfonnance. - (b) If the failure to perform is caused by the failure of a subcontractor at f any tier to perform or make progress, and if the cause of the failure was beyond l the control of both the Contractor and subcontractor, and without the fault or l negligence of either, the Contractor shall not be deemed to be in default,
.unless--
(1) The subcontracted supplies or services were obtainable from other sources; (2) The Contracting Officer ordered the Contractor in writing to purchase these supplies or services from the other source; and l (3) The Contractor failed to comply reasonably with this order. (c) Upon request of the Contractor, the Contracting Officer shall ascertain. the facts and extent of the failure. If the Contracting Officer determines that any failure to perform results from one or more of the causes above, the
- delivery schedule shall be revised, subject to the rights of the Government under the termination clause of this contract.
! (End of clause) (R 7-203.11 1969 AUG) (R 1-8.708) (R 7-605.39) (R 1-7.403-5) (R 7-702.7) s e.
RS-RES-84-128 Page 76 PART III - L.?ST OF DOCUMENTS EXHIBITS, AND OTHER ATTACHMENTS Section J - List of Attachments
' Attachment Number Title 1 NRC Organization Chart 2 NRC Contractor Organizational Conflicts of Interest (41 CFR Part 20) 3 Billing Instructions 4 NRC Manual Chapter 3202 5 Standard Form 1411 with Instructions
+
i i i l-
'i ".
) S RS-RES-84-128 Page 77 PART IV - REPRESENTATIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS Section K, - Representations, Certifications and Other Statements of Offerors or Quoters 52.203-4 CONTINGENT FEE REPRESENTATION AND AGREEMENT. (APR 1984) (a) Representation. The offeror represents that, except for full-time bona' fide employees working solely for the offeror, the offeror-- Note: The offeror must check the appropriate boxes. For interpretation of the representation, including the term " bona fide employee," see Subpart 3.4 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation. (1) / / has, / / has not employed or retained any person or company to solicit or obtain this contract; and (2) / / has, / / has not paid or agreed to pay to any person or company employed or retained to solicit or obtain this contract any commission, percentage, brokerage, or other fee contingent upon or resulting from the award of this contract. (b) Agreement. The offeror agrees to provide information relating to the above Representation as re by the Contracting Officer and, when subparagraph (a)(1) or (a)(2)questedis answered affirmatively, to promptly submit to the Contracting Officer-- (1) A completed Standard Form 119, Statement of Contingent or Other Fees, (SF 119); or (2) A signed statement indicating that the SF 119 was previously submitted to the same contracting office, including the date and applicable solicitation or contract number, and representing that the prior SF 119 applies to this offer or quotation. (End of' provision) (R 7-2002.1 1974 APR) (R 1-1.505) 52.215-6 TYPE OF BUSINESS ORGANIZATION. (APR 1984) The offeror or quoter, by checking the applicable box, represents that it operates as / / a corporation incorporated under the laws of the State of
......................,/ / an individual, / / a partnership, / / a nonprofit organization, or / / a joint venture.
(End of provision) (AV SF 33 1977 MAR) (R SF 198, Para 4,1976 JUNE) 52.215-11 AUTHORIZED NEGOTIATORS. (APR 1984) The offeror or quoter represents' that the following persons are authorized to negotiate on its behalf with the Government in connection with this request for proposals or quotations: Name Ti tle Phone Number (End of provision) (R 3-501(b) Sec K (iv))
.- . . - _. ._. - - . . . _ - - . - - . - - - , - - = - - - - . - - -
RS-RES-84-128 Page 78 , 3 52.215-20 PLACE OF PERFORMANCE. (APR1984) contract resulting from 4 this(a) The offeror or solicitation, / quoter,
/ intends, in the / performance
/ does not intend of any(check applicable block) to use one or more plants or facilities located at a different address from the
- address of the offeror or quoter as indicated in this proposal or quotation.
(b) If the offeror or quoter checks " intends" in paragraph (a) above, it f shall insert in the spaces provided below the required information: Name and Address of Owner Place of Performance (Street and Operator of the Plant or Address, City, County, State, Facility if Other than Offeror Zip Code) or Quoter
..............................g.g .g.g...............................
(R 3-501(b) Sec K (viii)) 52.219-1 SMALL BUSINESS CONCERN REPRESENTATION. (APR 1984) The offeror represents and certifies as part of its offer that it / / is,
/ / is not a small business concern and that / / all, / / not all supplies to
. be furnished will be manufactured or produced by a small business concern in the United States, its possessions, or Puerto Rico. "Small business concern," as used in this provision, means a concern, including its affiliates, that is independently owned and operated, not dominant in the field of operation in
, which it-is bidding on Government contracts, and qualified as a small business under the size standards in this solicitation. (End of provision) (R 3-501(b)(3), Part IV, Section K, (1)(A) 1979 SEP) 52.219-2 SMALL DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS CONCERN REPRESENTATION. (APR 1984) f . c (a) Representation. The offeror represents that it / / is, / / is not a small disadvantaged business concern. (b) Definitions.
" Asian-Indian American," as used in this provision, means a United States citizen whose origins are in India, Pakistan, or Bangladesh.
" Asian-Pacific American," as used in this provision, means a United States citizen whose origins are in Japan, China, the Philippines, Vietnam, Korea, l Samoa, Guam, the U.S. Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands, the Northern Mariana Islands, Laos, Cambodia, or Taiwan.
" Native Americans ," as used in this provision, means American Indians, Eskimos, Aleuts, and native Hawaiians.
"Small business concern," as used in this provision, means a concern ,
including its affiliates, that is independently owned and operated, not dominant ! in the field of operation in which it is bidding on Government contracts, and qualified as a small business under the criteria and size standards in 13 CFR 121.
"Small disadvantaged business concern," as used in this provision, means a small business concern that (1) is at least 51 percent owned by one or more individuals who are both socially and economically disadvantaged, or a publicly owned business having at least 51 percent of its stock owned by one or more l .
RS-RES-84-128 Page 79 socially and economically disadvantaged individuals and (2) has its management and daily business controlled by one or more such' individuals. (c) Qualified groups. The offeror shall presume that socially and individuals include Black Americans, Hispanic economically disadvantaged Americans, Native Americans, Asian-Pacific Americans, Asian-Indian Americans, and other individuals found to be qualified by the SBA under 13 CFR 124.1. 4 (End of provision) (R 7-2003.74 1980 AUG) (R 3-501(b)(3), Part IV, Section K, (1)(B) 1980 AUG) t 52.219-3 WOMEN-0WNED SMALL BUSINESS REPRESENTATION. (APR 1984) (a) Representation. The offeror represents that it / / is, / / is not a women-owned small business concern. (b) Definitions.
"Small business concern," as used in this provision, means a concern, including its affiliates, that is independently owned and operated, not dominant I' in the field of operation in which it is bidding on Government contracts, and qualified as a small business under the criteria and size standards in 13 CFR 121.
" Women-owned," as used in this provision, means a small business that is at least 51 percent owned by a woman or women who are U.S. citizens and who also control and operate the business.
(End of provision) (R FPR Temp. Reg 48 1978 DEC) 52.222-21 CERTIFICATION OF NONSEGREGATED FACILITIES. (APR1984) (a) " Segregated facilities," as used in this provision, means any waiting ' rooms, work areas, rest rooms and wash rooms, restaurants and other eating areas, time clocks, locker rooms and other storage or dressing areas, parking j lots, drinking fountains, recreation or entertainment areas, transportation, and i
- housing facilities provided for employees, that are . segregated by explicit directive or are in fact segregated on the basis of race, color, religion, or i national orig'in because of habit, local custom, or otherwise.
- (b) By the submission of this offer, the offeror certifies that it does not I
and will not maintain or provide for its employees any segregated facilities at any of its establishments, and that it does not and will not perinit its , employees to perform their services at any location under its control where segregated facilities are maintained. The offeror agrees that a breach of this ! certification is a violation of the Equal Opportunity clause in the contract. l (c) The offeror further agrees that (except where it has obtained identical l certifications from proposed subcontractors for specific time periods) it will-- l (1) Obtain identical certifications from proposed subcontractors before i the award of subcontracts under which the subcontractor will be subject to the Equal Opportunity clause; (2) Retain the certifications in the files; and (3) Forward the following notice to the proposed subcontractors (except if ' the proposed subcontractors have submitted identical certifications for specific time periods): l NOTICE'TO PROSPECTIVE SUBCONTRACTORS OF REQUIREMENT FOR CERTIFICATIONS OF NONSEGREGATED FACILITIES. 1
RS-RES-84-128 4 Page 80 A Certification of Nonsegregated Facilities must be submitted before the award' of a subcontract under which the subcontractor will be subject to the . Equal Opportunity clause. The certification may be submitted either for each subcontract or for all subcontracts during a period (i.e., quarterly, semiannually, or annually). NOTE: The penalty for making false statements in offers is prescribed in 18
- U.S.C. 1001.
(End of provision) (R 7-2003.14(b)(1)(A) 1970 AUG) (R 1-12.803-10(d)) 52.222-22 PREVIOUS CONTRACTS AND COMPLIANCE REPORTS. (APR 1984) The offeror represents that-- i (a) It / / has, / / has not participated in a previous contract or subcontract subject either to the Equal Opportunity clause of this solicitation, the clause originally contained in Section 310 of Executive Order No.10925, or the clause contained in Section 201 of Executive Order No. 11114; (b)It/ / has, / / has not, filed all required compliance reports; and (c) Representations indicating submission of required compliance reports, signed by proposed subcontractors, will be obtained before subcontract awards. (End of provision) (R 7-2003.14(b)(1)(B) 1973 APR) 52.222-25 AFFIRMATIVE ACTION COMPLIANCE. (APR 1984) The. offeror represents -that (a) it / / has developed and has on file, / / has not developed and does not have on file, at each establishment, affirmative action programs required by the rules and regulations of the Secretary of Labor (41 CFR 60-1 and 60-2), or (b) it / / has not previously had contracts subject to the written affirmative action programs requirement of the rules and t regulations of the Secretary (of Labor.End of provision) (R 7-2003.14(b) 1979 SEP) (R 1-12.805-4) 52.223-1 CLEAN AIR AND WATER CERTIFICATION. (APR 1984) . The Offeror certifies that-- (a) Any facility to be used in the performance of this proposed contract is
/ /, is not / / listed on the Environmental Protection Agency List of
- Violating Facilities; (b) The Offeror will imediately notify the Contracting Officer, before '
award, of the receipt of any comunication from the Administrator, or a i' designee, of the En'vironmental Protection Agency, indicating that any facility ! that the Offeror proposes to use for the performance of the contract is under consideration to be listed on the EPA List of Violating Facilities; and (c) The Offeror will include a certification substantially the same as this l certification, including this paragraph (c), in every nonexempt subcontract. (End of provision) (AV 7-2003.71 1977 JUN)
- (AV 1-1.2302-1) l .
.._E__.._-..___. . _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ , _ . _ _
RS-RES-84-128 Page 81 52.230-2 COST ACCOUNTING STANDARDS NOTICES AND CERTIFICATION (N0NDEFENSE). (APR 1984) Note: This notice does not. apply to small businesses or foreign governments. (a) Any contract over $100,000 resulting from this solicitation shall be subject to Cost Accounting Standards (CAS) if it is awarded to a business unit that is currently performing a national defense CAS-covered contract or subcontract, except when-- (1 The award is based on adequate price competition; (2 The price is set by law or regulation; (3 The price is based on established catalog or market prices of comercial items sold in substantial quantities to the general public; or (4) One of the exemptions in 4 CFR 331.30(b) applies (also see Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 30.301(b)). (b) Contracts not exempted from CAS shall be subject to full or modified coverage as follows: (1) If the business unit receiving the award is currently. performing a national defense contract or subcontract subject to full CAS coverage (4 CFR 331), from the this contract FAR entitledwill Costhave full CAS Accounting coverag(e Standards and will 52.230-3) contain and the clauses Administration of Cost Accounting Standards (52.230-4). (2) If the business unit receiving the award is currently performing a national defense contract or subcontract subject to modified CAS coverage (4 CFR 332), this contract will have modified coverage and will contain the clauses entitled Disclosure and Consistency of Cost Accounting Practices (52.230-5) and Administration of Cost Accounting Standards (52.230-4). A. Certificate of CAS Applicability The offeror hereby certifies that--
/ / The offeror is not performing any CAS-covered national defense contract ur subcontract. The offeror further certifies that it will immediately notify the Contracting Officer in writing if it is awarded any national defense CAS-covered contract or subcontract subsequent to the date of this certificate l
i but before the date of the award of a contract resulting from this solicitation. l (If this statement applies, no further certification is required.)
/ / The offeror is currently performing a negotiated national defense contract or subcontract that contains the Cost Accounting Standards clause at l FAR 52.230-3.
/ / The offeror is currently performing a negotiated national defense contract or subcontract that contains the Disclosure and Consistency of Cost Accounting Practices clause at FAR 52.230-5.
I B. Additional Certification--CAS Applicable Offerors
/ / The offeror subject to Cost Accounting Standards further certifies that practices used in estimating costs in pricing this proposal are consistent with the practices disclosed in the Disclosure Statement where it has been submitted j pursuant to CAS Board regulations (4 CFR 351).
' C. Data Required--CAS Covered Offerors The offeror certifying that it is currently performing a national defense contract containing either CAS clause (see A above) is required to furnish the name, address (including agency or department component), and telephone number 1
s RS-RES-84-128 Page 82 of the cognizant Contracting Officer administering the offeror's CAS-covered contracts. Name o f Co n t rac ti ng 0f fi ce r : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ad d re s s : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
- Telephone Number:.............................. ................
(End of provision) (R 1-3.1203-3(b)) 5 e f I ) i I 6 *
. - e. s L
RS-RES-84-128 Page 83 Section L - Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors or Quoters L.1 Acceptance Period Because of the 'imet required by the Government to evaluate proposals adequately, offerors are requested to specify a proposal acceptance period of not less than 90 days. l L.2 Cost of Proposal Preparation This solicitation does not commit the Government to pay any cost for the preparation and submission of a proposal or for necessary studies or designs for the preparation thereof; or to procure or contract for the 2 articles or services shown under Part III herein. L.3 RFP Identification Mailing envelopes should be marked with the RFP number, the RFP closing date, and the notation: "00 NOT OPEN IN MAIL ROOM." Also, include the RFP number in your cover letter and on each page of your proposal. L.4 Award Notification All offerors will be notified of their selection or nonselection as soon as possible. Formal notification of nonselection will not be made until a contract has been awarded. It is also brought to your attention that the Contracting Officer is the only individual who can legally commit the Government (i.e., the NRC) to expenditure of public funds in connection with this procurement. This means that unless provided in a contract document or specifically authorized by the Contracting Officer, NRC technical personnel cannot issue contract modifications, give informal contractual commitments or i* otherwise bind, commit, or obligate the NRC contractually. Informal contractual commitments include such actions as:
- 1. encouraging a-potential Contractor to incur costs prior to l receiving a contract,
! 2. requesting or requiring a Contractor to make changes under [ a contract without formal contract modifications, ! 3. encouraging a Contractor to incur costs under a i cost-reimbursable contract in excess of those costs contractually allowable, and
- 4. committing the Government to a course of action with regard to a potential contract, contract change, claim, or
~
l dispute. ! L.5 Disposition of Proposals After award of contract, two (2) copies of each unsuccessful proposal will .be retained by NRC's Division of Contracts and unitss return of
/.
RS-RES-84-128 Page 84 proposals. is requested by the offeror upon submission of proposal, all other copies will be destroyed. This notification should appear in any cover letter accompanying the proposal. L.6 Proposal Presentation and Format
- 1. Proposals will be typewritten or reproduced on letter-size paper and will be legible in all required copies.
- 2. Proposals in response to this Request for Proposal shall be submitted in the following three (3) separate and distinct parts:
(a) One (1) original signed copy of this solicitation package. All applicable sections must be completed by the offeror. (b) One (1) original and four (4) copies of the " Cost Proposal" shall be submitted in accordance with the guidelines set forth in the paragraph below entitled,
" Business Management Requirements."
(c) One (1) original and four (4) copies of the " Technical Proposal" shall be submitted in accordance with the guidelines set forth in the paragraph below entitled, " Technical Proposal Content." Each of the parts shall be separate and complete in itself so that evaluation of one may be accomplished I independently of evaluation of the other. All documents submitted shall have a cover page with the identifying RFP title, the solicitation number, and name of the offeror. i L.7 Business / Management Requirements ! 1. Cost Proposal The offeror should utilize the Standard Form 1411, Contracting Pricing Proposal Cover Sheet in submitting the Cost Proposal. Offerors may, however, submit the necessary information in a different format where the l offeror's accounting system makes use of the form l impracticable, or when required for a more effective and efficient presentation of cost information. In either ! instance, the information furnished shall include i pertinent details sufficient to show the elements of cost upon which the total cost is predicated. Cost will be evaluated on reasonableness, validity, and reliability. The " Cost Proposal" must include, but is not limited to, the following: l g -4
RS-RES-84-128 Page 85 Material - A detailed listing of items including the quantity, basis of cost estimate, unit cost and sources of cost. - Labor - The basis for the estimated hours broken down by category and task, and the source of labor rates. . Level of effort data shall be expressed in manhours. Indirect Cost - The source and basis of determination of all indirect costs. Travel - The breakdown of all travel by trips, segregating all tranportation and per diem costs. Copy . of the official Government approval of the offeror's travel policy, if granted, or in lieu thereof, a copy of the offeror's travel policy.
. NOTE: In the absence of a Government approved Contractor travel policy, the prevailing Federal Travel Regulation rates and the clause entitled, " Travel Reimbursement" in Part III shall apply.
Other - The offeror's fiscal accounting period (Fiscal Year) and the name, address, and the telephone number of the offeror's cognizant Government audit agency.
- 2. Management The management aspects shall include, but not be limited to, the following and any data pirtinent thereto:
(a) Project scheduling and contingency planning i' demonstrating a logical progression and integration l- of the tasks to insure completion within the performance period and without program slippage. l (b) Management organizational structure delineating areas of responsibility and authority under the proposed ! effort. Describe the relationship of the project organization to corporate management and to subcontractors, if any. Discuss the functions and authorities of the project manager. (c) Procedures to periodically review in-house organizational functions, program reviews and controls and subsequent coordination with the NRC. (d) Management controls expected to be utilized to preclude a contract cost growth.
- 3. Manpower Availability i
t
RS-RES-84-128 Page 86 4escribe the source of personnel required for performance of each task and not' presently employed by tne offeror. If any of the personnel are under comitment, describe the tenris of the comitment(s). Note specifically the personnel that will be on board subject to a contract award.
- 4. Consultants Explain the need for consultant services. List proposed consultants if known by name. For each list show (1) nature of services, (2) fee rate, and (3) total consultant fee and any other allowable related costs which may be involved, such as travel and per diem. Such fees may not be paid to employees of the Contractor or to employees of the U.S. Government.
- 5. Subcontractors If the offeror plans to subcontract any of the work to be performed, list proposed subcontractors if known by name.
Provide a detailed breakdown of specific work to be subcontracted and the approximate cost involved.
- 6. Labor Surplus Area Program Requirements In keeping with the Federal Labor Surplus Area Program, the offeror is required to provide information on the general economic conditions of the area in which subcontractors are located, exact location of (state, city, county), and the unemployment rate for the area, if known.
- 7. Additional Facilities or Property In the event the offeror contemplates acquiring additional facilities or property in the performance of this work, such facilities or property shall be separately identified.
- 8. Other Contractual Comitments l
The offeror shall list any comitments with other organizations, Governmental or private, and indicate whether these comitments will or will not interfere with the completion of work and sevices contemplated under this proposal. L.8 Technical Proposal Content The Technical Proposal shall not contain any reference to cost. Resource information such as data concerning labor hou rs , and I categories, materials, subcontracts, travel, computer time, etc. , shall i .
c .. RS-RES-84-128
, Page 87 1
be included in .the Technical Proposal so that the offeror's understanding of the scope of work may be evaluated. The offeror shall submit with the Technical Proposal full 'and complete information as - set forth below to permit the Government to make . a thorough evaluation and a sound determination that the proposed approach will have 'a reasonable likelihood of. meeting the requirements and objectives of this procurement _ in accordance with the evaluation criteria set forth in this Part II under the paragraph entitled,
." Evaluation of Proposals."
Statements- which paraphrase the scope of work without communicating the specific innovation proposed by the offeror or statements to the effect that the offeror's understanding can or will comply with the scope of work may be construed as an indication of the offeror's lack of understanding of the scope of work and objectives. The Technical Proposal shall set forth as a minimum the following:
- 1. Discussion of the scope of work requirements to substantiate the offeror's understanding of the problem and his proposed method of approach to meet the objective.
- 2. Discussion of the offeror's experience in the analysis of regulatory systems (nuclear and otherwise). Include the contract numbers and Government points of contact.
I 3. Include resumes for all professional personnel to be utilized in the performance of any resulting contract. Include eoucational background, specific pertinent work experience and a list of any pertinent publications authorized by the individual.
- 4. Discuss support personnel and facilities available to assist the professional personnel.
! 5. Indicate potential problem areas and the approach to be taken to resolve said areas.
- 6. Provide a detailed description of the schedule for work and identify significant milestones completion dates for various subparts.
- 7. Identify the " Key Personnel," and for the person (s) so identified, specify the percentage of time currently comitted to other projects l
over the course of the proposed contract period of performance. l
- 8. Statements of any interpretations, requirements, or assumptions made by the offeror.
- 9. Describe any significant current contractual and organizational relationships of the offeror, its employees or expected i
subcontractor (s), with industries regulated by the NRC (e.g., utilities, etc.) and- suppliers thereof (e.g., architect engineers,
- reactor manufacturers, or . applicants / licensees, etc.) that might give rise to an apparent or actual conflict of interest (as
= ,
_ . - _ _ _ . __ _~. _ - _ -- _ _. ,__ - - - - - _ _ . _ _ _ . _ _ RS-RES-84-128 Page 88 described in Attachment 1 to this Request for Proposals in the event of an award to offeror. i A negative statement, if applicable, is required to be submitted. Special Notice (Technical Proposal Content) Offerors should include in the technical proposal a sufficient but not elaborate discussion of the relevant geologic and seismologic considerations of the area, as necessary to justify the approach proposed by the offeror. Offerors are to present in the technical proposal a well thought out but not elaborate plan of field work and analysis for Task 2, using available techniques
> to the best advantage and keeping in mind that the amount of funds available for this project is limited. The plan should be founded on a clear outline of what methods are to be used and why, and what general locations should be investigated. Any assumptions made in developing the plan should be stated.
This outline of proposed work is needed for judging the likelihood of success of a given proposal. It is, of course, recognized that Task 1 serves the purpose of formulating a detailed and final work plan and that plans given in a proposal may have to be considerably changed before proceeding with Task 2. However, it is highly probable that certain techniques that an offeror proposes and is i familiar which will actually be used and be more conducive to success than other techniques. Offerors should include in the proposal a description of previous work and experience that specifically relates to the proposed work. It will be necessary for offerors to demonstrate proficiency and available expertise in a number of geological / geophysical techniques, unless it can be shown that a single technique provides the best chance for success. L.9 Solicitation Provisions l 52.215-5 SOLICITATION DEFINITIONS. (APR 1984) I " Offer" means " proposal" in negotiation.
" Solicitation" means a request for proposals (RFP) or a request for quotations (RFQ) in negotiation.
(End of provision) l (R SF 33A, Para 1, 1978 JAN) . 52.215-7 UNNECESSARILY ELABORATE PROPOSALS OR QUOTATIONS. (APR 1984) Unnecessarily elaborate brochures or other presentations beyond those sufficient to present a complete and effective response to this solicitation are
- not desired and may be construed as an indication of the offeror's or quoter's lack of cost consciousness. Elaborate art work, expensive paper and bindings, and expensive visual and other presentation aids are neither necessary nor l wanted.
l (End of provision) l (AV 7-2003.40 1969 OCT) l 1
. b i ,' .,
RS-RES-84-128 i Page 89 52.215-8 ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF AMENDMENTS TO SOLICITATIONS. (APR1984) i Offerors shall acknowledge receipt of any amendment to this solicitation (a) by signing and returning the amendment; (b) by identifying the amendment number and date in the space provided for this purpose on the form for submitting an , offer; or (c) by letter or telegram. The Government must receive the acknowledgment by the time specified for receipt of offers. (End of provision) l (R SF 33A Para 4,1978 JAN) 52.215-9 SUBMISSION OF OFFERS. (APR 1984) , (a) Offers and modifications thereof shall be submitted in sealed envelopes or packages (1) addressed to the office specified in the solicitation and (2) showing the time specified for receipt, the solicitation number, and the name and address of the offeror. (b) Telegraphic offers will not be considered unless authorized by the solicitation; however, offers may be modified by written or telegraphic notice, if that notice is received by the time specified for receipt of offers.
- (c) Item samples, if required, must be submitted within the time specified for receipt of offers. Unless otherwise specified in the solicitation, these samples shall be (1) submitted at no expense to the Government and (2) re, turned at the sender's request and expense, unless they are destroyed during preaward testing.
(End of provision)
(R SF 33A Para 5, 1978 JAN)
! 52.215-10 LATE SUBMISSIONS, MODIFICATIONS, AND WITHDRAWALS OF PROPOSALS. (APR 1984) (a) Any proposal received at the office designated in the solicitation after, the exact time specified for receipt will not be considered unless it is received before award is made and it-- (1) Was sent by registered or certified mail not later than the fifth calendar day before the date specified for receipt of offers (e.g., an offer submitted in response to a solicitation requiring receipt of offers by the 20th of the month must have been mailed by the 15th); (2) Was sent by mail (or telegram if authorized) and it.is determined by the Government that the late receipt was due solely to mishandling by the Government after receipt at the Government installation; or-(3) Is the only proposal received. (b) Any modification of a proposal or quotation, except a modificatio_n
- resulting from the Contracting Officer's request for "best and final" offer, is subject to the same conditions as in subparagraphs (a)(1) and (2) above.
(c) A modification resulting from the Contracting Officer's request for "best and final" offer received after the time and date specified in the request will not be considered unless received before award and the late receipt is due solely to mishandling by the Government after receipt at the Government installation. (d) The only acceptable evidence to establish the date of mailing of a late proposal or modification sent either by registered or certified mail is the U.S. or Canadian Postal Service postmark on the wrapper or on the original receipt from the U.S. or Canadian Postal Service. If neither postmar_k shows a legible date, the proposal, quotation, or modification shall be processed as if mailed
4 RS-RES-84-128 Page 90 ! late. " Postmark" means a printed, stamped, or otherwise placed impression (exclusive of a postage meter machine impression) that is readily identifiable
- without further action as having bean supplied and affixed by employees of the U.S. or Canadian Postal Service on the date of mailing. Therefore, offerors or quoters should request the postal clerks to place a har.d cancellation bull's-eye postmark on both the receipt and the envelope or wrapper.
(e) The only acceptable evidence to establish the time of receipt at the Government installation is the time /date stamp of that installation on the . proposal . wrapper or other documentary evidence of receipt maintained by the installation. (f) Notwithstanding paragraph (a) above, a late modification of an otherwise successful proposal that makes its terms more favorable to the Government will be considered at any time it is received and may be accepted. (g) Proposals may be withdrawn by written notice or telegram (including mailgram) received at any time before award. Proposals may be withdrawn in person by an offeror or an authorized representative, if the representative's identity is made known and the representative signs a receipt for the proposal before award. (End of provision) (R 7-2002.4 1979 MAR) , (1-3.802.1) 52.215-12 RESTRICTION ON DISCLOSURE AND USE OF DATA. (APR 1984) Offerors or quoters who include in their proposals or quotations data that they . do not want disclosed to the public for any purpose or used by the i Government except for evaluation purposes, shall-- (a) Mark the title page with the following legend:
"This proposal or quotation includes data that shall not be disclosed outside the Government and shall not be duplicated, used, or disclosed--in whole or in part--for any purpose other than to evaluate this proposal or quotation.
If, however, a contract is awarded to this offeror or quoter as a result of--or in connection with--the submission of this data, the Government shall have the right to duplicate, use, or disclose the data to the extent provided in the resulting contract. This restriction does not limit the Government's right to i use information contained in this data if it is obtained from another source without restriction. The data subject to this restriction are contained in i sheets ......[ insert numbers or other identification of sheets]"; and (b) Mark each sheet of data it wishes to restrict with the following legend:
"Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the restriction on the title page of this proposal or quotation."
(End of provision) (R 3-501(b) Sec L (xxiv)) 52.215-13 PREPARATION OF OFFERS. (APR1984) (a) Offerors are expected to examine the drawings, specifications, Schedule,
, and all instructions. Failure to do so will be at the offeror's risk.
(b) Each offeror shall furnish the infonnation required by the . solicitation. The offeror shall sign the offer and print or type its name on the Schedule and 4 each continuation sheet on which it makes an entry. Erasures or other changes must be initialed by the person signing the offer. Offers signed by an agent shall be accompanied by evidence of that agent's authority, unless that evidence
- has been previously furnished to the issuing office.
4
% D s 8 . .
- - = - - - . = = - - y ..- , , .-,-,,.,-.,,.--,+.,-,--e ,,- ,, -,, ,,, -c -.<--,---,,,..--,ev--, ,,.-- c.,-----------,-w-,y-, , ,=-
~ . _ . _ . _ . - _ - . - _ - - - - . - _.. .- - - - _ . . _- .--.-
l l t' ' RS-RES-84-128 Page 91 (c) For each item offered, offerors shall (1) show the unit price / cost, , including, unless otherwise specified, packaging, packing, and preservation and (2) enter the extended-price / cost for the quantity of each item offered in the
" Amount" column of the Schedule. In case of discrepancy between a unit price / cost and an extended price / cost, the unit price / cost will be presumed to be correct, subject, however, to correction to the same extent and in the same manner as any other mistake.
(d) Offers for supplies or services other than those specified will not be considered unless authorized by the solicitation. (e) Offerors must state a definite time for delivery of supplies or for performance of services, unless otherwise specified in the solicitation. (f) Time, if stated as a number of days, will include Saturdays, Sundays, and holidays. (End of provision) ,' ('R SF 33A, Para 2,1978 JAN) 52.215-14 ~ EXPLANATION TO PROSPECTIVE OFFERpRS. (APR 1984) Any prospective offeror desiring an explanation or interpretation of the solicitation, drawings, specifications, etc, must request it in writing soon enough to allow a reply .to reach all propsective offerors before the submission of their offers. Oral explanations or instructions given before the award of the contract will not be binding. Any information given to a prospective offeror concerning a solicitation will be furnished promptly to all other , prospective offerors as an amendment of the solicitation, if that information is necessary in submitting offers or if the lack of it would be prejudicial to any
- other prospective offerors.
(End of provision) (R SF 33A, Para 3, 1978 JAN) 52.215-15 FAILURE TO SUBMIT OFFER. (APR1984) 4 - Recipients of this solicitation not responding with an offer should not i return this solicitation, unless it specifies otherwise. Instead, they should advise the issuing office by letter or postcard whether they want to receive future solicitations for similar requirements. If a recipient does not submit an offer and does not notify the issuing office that future solicitations are desired, the recipient's name may be removed from the applicable mailing list. (End of' provision)
. (R SF 33A, Para 6,1978 JAN)
- 52.215-16 CONTRACT AWARD. (APR 1984)
(a) The Government will award a contract resulting from this solicitation to the responsible offeror whose offer conforming to the solicitation will be most advantageous to the Government, cost or price and other factors, specified elsewhere in this solicitation, considered.
- (b) The Government may (1) reject any or all offers, (2) accept other than the lowest offer, and (3) waive informalities and minor irregularities in offers received.
(c) The Governme'it may award a contract on the basis of initial offers ' received, without discussions. Therefore, each initial offer should contain the offeror's best terms from a cost 'or price and technical standpoint. m -e - . . - - , , - - - - - - - - - ..-,-,v.--,,e ,.m ,.,,e,,n,- , - - - , , . ,.g.---. _ - - - + , ,,--n ,- - ---n--
RS-RES-84-128 Page 92 (d) The Government may accept any item or group of items of an offer, unless the offeror qualifies the offer by specific limitations. Unless otherwi3e provided in the Schedule, offers may be submitted for quantities less than those specified. The Government reserves the rignt to make an award on any item for a . quantity less than the quantity offered, at the unit cost or prices offered, unless the offeror specifies otherwise in the offer. (e) A written award or acceptance of offer mailed or otherwise furnished to the successful offeror within the time for acceptance specified in the offer shall result in a binding contract without further action by either party. Before the offer's specified expiration time, the Government may accept an offer (or part of an offer, as provided in paragraph (d) above), whether or not there are negotiations after its receipt, unless a written notice of withdrawal is received before award. Negotiations conducted after receipt of an offer do not constitute a rejection or counteroffer by the Government. (f) Neither financial data submitted with an offer, nor representations concerning facilities or financing, will form a part of the resulting contract. However, if the resulting contract contains a clause providing for price reduction for defective cost or pricing data, the contract price will be subject to reduction if cost or pricing data furnished is incomplete, inaccurate, or not current. (End of provision) (R SF 33A, Para 10,1978 JAN) 52.215-18 ORDER OF PRECEDENCE. (APR 1984) Any inconsistency in this solicitation shall be resolved by giving precedence in the following order: (a) the Schedule (excluding' the specifications); (b) representations and other instructions; (c) contract clauses; (d) other documents, exhibits, and attachments; and (e) the specifications. (End of provision) (R 7-2003.41 1973 APR) 52.216-1 TYPE OF CONTRACT. (APR 1984) The Government contemplates award' of a Cost-Plus-Fixed-Fee contract resulting from this solicitation. (End of provision) (R 3-501(b) Sec L (iv)) j 52.222-45 NOTICE OF COMPENSATION FOR PROFESSIONAL EMPLOYEES. (APR 1984) t l Note the provisions relating to evaluation of . compensation for professional L employees set forth elsewhere in this solicitation. Failure to comply with these provisions may constitute sufficient cause to justify rejection of a proposal. The total compensation plan required to be submitted by the offeror will be viewed as being within the purview of Public Law 87-653 (10 U.S.C. 2306(f)) and in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation 15.802(a). (End of provision) (AV 7-2003.78 1978 JUN) i f I t 8 u.
. ~ . _ . --. - _
, RS-RES-84-128 ; Page 93 l 52.227-6 ROYALTY INFORMATION. (APR 1984) (a) Cost or charges for royalties. When the response to this solicitation contains costs or charges for royalties totaling more than $250, the following information shall be included in the' response relating to each separate item of royalty or license fee: . 1) Name and address of licensor.
- 2) Date of license agreement.
- 3) Patent numbers patent application serial numbers, or other basis on
- which the royalty is payable.
(4) Brief description, including any part or model numbers of each . contract item or component on which the royalty is payable. l Percentage or dollar rate of royalty per unit. , Unit price of contract item.
. Number of units.
) Total dollar amount of royalties.
(b) Copies of current licenses. In addition, if specifically requested by the Contracting Officer before execution of the contract, the offeror shall furnish a copy of the current license agreement and an identification of applicable claims of specific patents. (End of provision)
- (R 7-2003.42 1961 AUG) ,
- 52.222-46 EVALUATION OF COMPENSATION FOR PROFESSIONAL EMPLOYEES.
! (APR 1984) (a) Recompetition of service contracts may in some cases result in lowering the compensation (salaries and fringe benefits) paid or furnished professional
- employees. This lowering can be detrimental in obtaining the quality of professional services needed for adequate contract performance. It is therefore ,
i in the Government's best interest that professional employees, as defined in 29 CFR 541, be properly and fairly compensated. As a part of their proposals, offerors will submit a total compensation plan setting forth salaries and fringe [ benefits proposed for the professional employees who will work under the contract. The Government will evaluate the plan to assure that it reflects a sound management approach and' understanding of the contract requirements. This evaluation will include an assessment of the offeror's ability to provide t uninterrupted high-quality work. The professional compensation proposed will be considered in terms of its impact upon recruiting and retention, its realism, and its consistency with a total plan for compensation. Supporting information will include data, such as recognized national and regional compensation surveys and studies of professional, public and private organizations, used in , establishing the total compensation structure. . l (b) The compensation levels proposed should reflect a clear understanding of work to be performed and should indicate the capability of the proposed compensation structure to obtain and keep suitably qualified personnel to meet , mission objectives. The salary rates or ranges must take into account differences in skills, the complexity of various disciplines, and professional job difficulty. Additionally, proposals envisioning compensation levels lower than those of predecessor contractors for the same work will be evaluated on the basis of maintaining program continuity, uninterrupted high-quality work, and availability of required competent professional service employees. Offerors are cautioned that lowered compensation for essentially the same professional work l
- _ .--__ . . - _ _ . . _ _ . , . _ . , _ . .__,-,.._.______,_,,,,.,,___._.,.,,._-.~.-_,,_,_____..___m_,,m,,_,_r . _ , _ _ . . ,
RS-RES-84-128 Page 94 may indicate lack of sound management judgment and lack of understanding of the requirement. , (c) The Government is concerned with the quality and stability of the work force to be employed on this contract. Professional compensation that is unrealistically low or not in reasonable relationship to the various job categories, since it may impair the Contractor's ability to attract and retain competent professional service employees, may be viewed as evidence of failure to comprehend the complexity of the contract requirements. (End of provision) (R 7-2003.79 1978 JUN) 52.252-1 ' SOLICITATION PROVISIONS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE. (APR 1984) This solicitation incorporates the following solicitation provisions by reference, with the same force and effect as if they were given in full text. Upon request, the Contracting Officer will make their full text available. I. FEDERAL ACQUISITION REGULATION (48 CFR CHAPTER 1) SOLICITATION PROVISIONS 11................................... [ insert regulation name](48 CFR CHAPTER........) SOLICITATION PROVISIONS (End of provision) (R 7-001) M.1 CONTRACT AWARD AND EVALUATION OF PROPOSALS
- a. By use of numerical and nurrative scoring techniques, proposals will be evaluated against the evaluation factors specified in the paragraph below.
These factors are listed in their relative order of importance. Award will be made to the offeror (1) whose proposal is technically acceptable and (2) whose technical / cost relationship is most advantageous to the Government; and who is considered to be responsible within the meaning of Federal Acquisition Regulation Part 9.1.
***Although cost will be a factor in the evaluation of proposals, technical merit in Criteria A through C will be more significant factors in the selection of a Contractor. Further, to be selected for an award, the proposed cost must be realistic and reasonable.
- b. Proposals will be evaluated in accordance with the following weighted factors, listed in the order of their relative importance:
Weights (Based on 100 Points) h e ,
.c, ,
RS-RES-84-128 Page 95 A. Technical Approach 55%
- 1. Understanding of the Problem 15%
The proposal must demonstrate a state-of-the-art understanding of the seismicity of the Charleston area and its relation to other areas of seismicity in the eastern U.S., of the possible explanations for the Charleston seismicity, and of the factors that need to be considered for further exploration in this area.
. 2. Understanding of the Methods to be Used 15%
The proposal must demonstrate an understanding of the specific geophysical and geological methods of investigation that may be brought to bear on the problem.
- 3. Proposed Plan 25% .
f
.The proposal will be evaluated on the soundness of the approach chosen to achieve the aim of this RFP.
This includes the choice of methods to be used, and the practical understanding of obstacles that may be encountered and of means to assure the success of the project. B. Related Experience 35% Key personnel and company experience in performing similar work will be evaluated. Experience in the tectonic problems of this region and in applying the
; methods of investigation are. of particular interest.
C. Management 10%
- 1. Program Management 5:
The proposal will be evaluated on the basis of a clear definition and suitability of the roles and authority of the program manager and other key personnel.
- 2. Quality Assurance 5%
The proposal will be evaluated on the basis of the quality assurance program proposed by the offeror. l l
I RS-RES-84-128 Page 96 M.2 52.217-3 EVALUATION EXCLUSIVE OF OPT!0flS. (APR 1984) The Government will evaluate offers'for award purposes by including only the price for the basic requirement; i.e. , options will not be included in the evaluation for award purposes. (Endofprovision) * (R 1-1504(a)) L i { i I e S
.. . - , . . . , _ . . . . _ _ . . . - . - . , - . , - _ - . _ _ _ _ _ , - - + _ _ . _ , . - _ . . _ _ _ _ _ - .
RS-RES-84-128 Page 97 ~ ATTACHMENT 1
- - __ _ _ II
[ . . 3
.I I6 i I4 i II !. i E li ' ! ill llila i ililEI.lll.
10 l il.!!!$iQ 11 il - I ia l ll'- . I a, 3 i a . i
. .a I i I i i i i i
!! ~
3l '
.= I I ll II -
!!! I iljillill[ill ! idli!l 1 I . 1 1 :
I I I I I I T ! - - (j _ !g ii - 5 Il ic I il "F a a agj i i :
!3 lh i
fli U a g . 5 1lL I 3
] ll3 III , g il a
gj l a i i l I 5 i i S I I I y .7 E l ! I ag - aj 'a! ag st!
- !.i a ;i j Il l:
a i gi a ;;
- - Is i c;;
'l
;I'
'I n
l i 1 s ,. i i i i 1;; a l h. ! ag i! a,i al il 3, I - a 3 11 11 !,!! 1:1 II:, '
- u.
*g 3;
[l I I I I i
-i ,
l 3! 3 3
! si .Ia _
!lI,, lj L8! !
i! li '; a l1 *gl - 1 I I a
-. -,,-en,.. _ - . - - . , - . - . . , , - , , , , , , . , , -
RS-RES-84-128 Pagn 98 ~ ATTACHMENT 2 PART 20-1 -- GENERAL . Subpart 20-1.54--Contractor Organizational Conflicts of Interest Sec. 20-1.5401 Scope and policy. 20-1.5402 Definitions. 20-1.5403 Criteria for recognizing contractor organizational conflicts of interest. 20-1.5404 Representation. 20-1.5405 Contract clauses. 20-1.5405-1 General contract clause. 20-1.5405-2 Special contract provisions. 20-1.5406 Evaluation, findings, and contract award. 20-1.5407 Conflicts identified after award. 20-1.5408 (Reserved) 20-1.5409 (Reserved) 20-1.5410 Subcontractors. ' 20-1.5411 Waiver. 20-1.5412 Remedies. AUTHORITY: .Sec. 8, Pub. L. 95-601, adding Sec.170A to Pub. L. 83-703, 68 Stat. 919, as amended (42 U.S.C. ch.14) 120-1.5401 Scope and Policy (a) It is the policy of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to avoid, eliminate or neutralize contractor organizational conflicts of interest. The NRC achieves this objective by requiring all prospective contractors to submit information describing relationships, if any, with organizations or persons (including those regulated by HRC) which may give rise-to actual or potential conflicts of interest in tne event of contract award. (b) Contractor conflict of interest determinations cannot be made automatically or routinely; the application of sound judgment on virtually a case-by-case basis is necessary if the policy is to be applied so as to satisfy the overall public interest. It is not possible to prescribe in advance a specific method or set of criteria which would serve to identify and resolve all of the contractor conflict of interest situations which might arise; however, examples are provided in these regulations to guide application of the policy. NRC contracting and progran officials must be alert to other situations which may warrant application of this policy guidance. The ultimate test is: Might the contractor, if awarded the con;ract, be placed in a position where its judgment may be biased, or where it may have an unfair competitive advantage? (c) The conflict of interest . rule contained in this suupart applies te contractors and offerors only. Individuals or firms who have other relationships with NRC (e.g., parties to a licensing proceeding) are not covered by this regulation. This rule does not apply to the acquisition - of consulting services through the personnel appointment orocess, NRC
RS-RES-84-128 Page 99 7590-01
- agreements with other government agencies, international organizations, ,
l or state, local or foreign governments; separate procedures for avoiding' conflicts of interest will be employed in such agreements, as appropriate. t j 520-1.5402 Definitions (a) " Organizational conflicts of interest" means that a relationship 4 exists whereby a contractor or prospective contractor has present or l Planned interests related to the work to be perfomed under an NRC 1 contract.which: (1) May diminish its capacity to give impartial, technically I sound, objective assistance and advice or may otherwise result in a l biased work product, or (2) may result in its being given an unfair ! competitive advantage. l (b) "Research" means any scientific or technical work involving theoretical analysis, exploration, or experimentation. l (c)
- Evaluation activities" means any effort involving the appraisal of a technology, process, product, or policy.
, (d) " Technical consulting and management support services" means internal assistance to a component of the NRC in the fomulation or administration of its programs, projects, or policies which normally require the contractor to be given access to information which has not been made available to the public or proprietary information'. Such I services typically include assistance in the preparation of program plans; arid preparation of preliminary designs, specifications, or statements of work. l (e) " Contract" means any contract, agreement, or other arrangement j with the NRC except as provided in Section 20-1.5401(c). I - l (f) " Contractor" means any person, firm, unincorporated association. l joint venture, co-sponstor, partnership, corporation, affiliates thereof, i or their successors in interest, including their chief executives, directors, key personnel (identified in the contract), proposed consultants or subcontractors, which is a party to a contract with the NRC. (g) " Affiliates'~ means business concerns which are affiliates of each other when either directly or indirectly one concern or individual controls or has the power to control another, or when a third party I centrols or has the power to control both (41 CFR 51-1.606-1(e)).
- (h) " Subcontractor" means any subcontractor of any tier which j performs work under a contract with the NRC except subcontracts for l supplies and subcontracts in amounts of $10,000 or less.
(i) " Prospective contractor" or " offeror" means any person, firm, unincorporated association, joint venture, partnership, corporation, or affiliates thereof, including its chief executive, directors, key personnel
. (identified in the proposal), proposed consultants', or subcontractors, submitting a bid or proposal, solicited or unsolicited, to the NRC to obtain a contract. ~
'* RS-RES-84-128 Page 100 . _
7590-01 (j) " Potential conflict of interest" means that a factual situation exists that suggests (indicates) that an actual conflict of interest may arise from award of a proposed contract. The tenn " potential conflict of interest" is used to signify those situations which merit investigation prior to contract award in order to ascertain whether award would give rise to an actual conflict or which must be . reported to the contracting officer for investigation if they arise during contract perfonnance. I20-1.5403 Criteria for recognizing contractor organizational conflicts of interest (a) General. Two questions will be asked in detennining whether actual or potential organizational conflicts of interest exist: (1) Are there conflicting roles which might bias a contractor's judgment in relation to its work for the NRC7 (2) May the contractor be given an unfair competitive advantage based on the perfonnance of the contract? - The ultimate detennination by NRC as to whether organizational conflicts of interest exist will be made in light of connon sense and good business judgment based upon the relevant facts disclosed and the work to be perfonned. While it is dif.ficult to identify and to prescribe in advance a specific method for avoiding all of the various' situations or relationships which might involve potential organizational conflicts of interest, NRC personnel will pay particular attention to p:oposed contractual requirements which call for the rendering of advice, consultation or evaluation
- activities, or similar activities that lay direct gre mdwork for the ~ ~
NRC's decisions on regulatory activities, future procurements, and L research programs. i (b) Situations or relationships which may give rise to organizational conflicts of interest. (1) The offeror or contractor shall disclose infonnation ccncerning relationships which may give rise to organizational conflicts of interest under the following circumstances: (1) Where the offeror or contractor provides advice and reconnendations to the NRC in a technical area in which it is also providing consulting assistance in the same arec to any organization regulated by the NRC. (ii) Where the offeror or contractor provides advice to the NRC on the sa a or similar matter in which it is also providing assistance to any organization regulated by the NRC. (iii) Where the offeror or contractor evaluates its own products or services, or the products or services of another entity where the offeror or contractor has been substantially involved in their development or marketing. (iv) Where the award of a contract would otherwise result in placing the offeror or contractor in a conflicting role in which its judgment may be biased in relation to its woi k for the NRC or may otherwi<c - result in an unfair competitive advantage for the offeror or contractor. 3-
- - - - - - - - - _ - - - - - - - - - _ _ - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ - ____m .----,_.m -,- ,,,-.<y-., _-,e ---,c-- , - -- ,,,r.,y-,-,9 7m
--- - - - - - ,w,
RS-RES-84-128 Page 101 7590-01 (2) The contracting officer may request specific infomation from an offeror or contractor or may require special contract provisions such as provided in i20-1.5405-2 in the following circumstances: (1) Where the offeror or contractor prepares specifications which are to be used in competitive procurements of products or services covered by such specifications. (ii) Where the offeror or contractor prepares plans for specific approaches or methodologies that are to be incorporated into competitive procurements using such approaches or methodologies. (iii) Where the offeror or contractor is granted access to infomation not available to the public concerning NRC plans, policies, or programs which could form the basis for a later procurement action. (iv) Where the offeror or contractor is granted access to proprietary information of its competitors. . ! (v) Where the award of a contract might othentise result in placing the offeror or contractor in a conflicting role in which its judgment may be biased in relation to its work for the NRC or may otherwise result in an unfair competitive advantage for the offeror or contractor. (c) Policy application guidance. The following examples are illustrative only and are not intended to identify and resolve all contractor organizational conflict of interest situations. (1) Example. The XYZ Corp., in response to a request for proposal (RFP), proposes to
' ~ undertake certain analyses of a reactor component as called for in the RFP. The XYZ Corp. is one of several companies considered to be technically 7 well qualified. In response to the inquiry in the RFP, the XYZ Corp.
advises that it is currently performing similar analyses for the reactor manufacturer. Guidance. An NRC contract for that particular work nortnally would not be awarded to the XYZ Corp. because it would be placed in a position in which its judgment could be biased in relationship to its work for NRC. Since there are other well-qualified companies available, there would be no reason for considering a waiver of the policy. (2) Example. The A8C Corp., in response to a RFP, proposes to perform certain analyses of a reactor component which are unique to one type of advanced reactor. As is the case with other technically qualified companies responding to the RFP, the ABC Corp. is perfoming various projects for several different utility clients. None of the ABC Corp. projects have any relationship to the work called for in the RFP. Based on the NRC evaluation, the ABC Corp. is considered to be the best qualified 4 company to perform the work outlined in the RFP. 4 6 .
~~ ' - - ' '" _ _ _ _ _ __,___,_._,___ _ ___ , _ _ _ _ _
RS-RES-84-128 Page 102 _ 7590-01 Guidance. An NRC contract normally could be awarded to the ABC Corp. because no conflict of interest exists which would motivate bias with respect to the work. An appropriate clause would be included in the contract to preclude the ABC Corp. from subsequently contracting for work during the performance of the NRC contract with the privats sector which could create a conflict. For example, ABC Corp. would be precluded from the perfomance of similar work for the company developing the advanced reactor mentioned in the example. (3) Example. As a result of operating problems in a certain type of commercial nuclear facility, it is imperative that NRC secure specific data on various . operational aspects of that type of plant so as to assure adequate safety protection of the public. Only one manufacturer has extensive experience with that type of plant. Consequently, that company is the only one with whom NRC can contract which can develop and conduct the testing programs required to obtain the data in reasonable .
- time. That company has a definite interest in any NRC decisions that .
might result from the data produced because those decisions affect the reactor's design and thus the company's costs. l Guidance. This situation would place the manufacturer in a role in
- l which its judgment could be biased in relationship to its work for NRC.
Since the nature of the work required is vitally important in terms of NRC's responsibilities and no reasonable alternative exists, a waiver of the policy may be warranted. Any such waiver shall be fully documented and coordinated in accordance with the waiver provisions of this policy l I with particular attention to the establishment of protective mechanisms to guard against bias. (4) Example. The ABC Co. submits a proposa'l for a new system for evaluating a specific reactor component's perfonnance for the purpose of developing standards that are important to the NRC program. The ABC Co. has advised NRC that it intends to sell the new system to industry once its practicability has been demonstrated. Other companies in this business are using older systems for evaluation of the specific reactor l. component. i ! Guidance. A contract could be awarded to the ABC Co. provided that the contract stipulates that no infonnation produced under the contract will be used in the contractor's private activities unless such information has been reported to NRC. Information which is reported to NRC by contractors will normally be disseminated by NRC to others so as to preclude an unfair competitive advantage that might otherwise accrue. When NRC furnishes information to the contractor for the perfonnance of contract work, it shall not be used in the contractur's private activities unless such infonnation is generally available to others. Further,. the contract will stipulate that the contractor will inform the NRC contracting officer of all situations in which the information developed under the contract is proposed to be used. l -
I RS-RES-84-128
.Page 103 7590-01 (5) Example. The ABC Corp., in response to a UP proposes to assemble a map showing certain seismological features of the Appalachian fold belt. In accordance with the representation in the RFP and
$20-1.5403(b)(1)(1), ABC Corp. informs the NRC that it is presently doing seismolog'ical studies for several utilities in the Eastern United States but none of the sites are within the geographic area contemplated by the NRC study.
Guidance. The contracting officer would normally conclude that award of a contract would not place ABC Corp. in a conflicting role where its judgment might be biased. The work for others clause of 8 20-1.5405-1(c) would preclude ABC Corp. from accepting work during the tem of the NRC contract which could create a conflict of interest. (d) Other considerations. (1) The fact that the NRC can identify and later avoid, eliminate, or neutralize any potential organizational ' conflicts arising from the performance of a contract is not relevant to a determination of the existence of such conflicts prior to the award of a contract. (2) It is not relevant that the contractor has the professional reputation of being able to resist temptations which arise from organizational conflicts of interest, or that a follow-on procurement is not involved, or that a contract is awarded on a competitive or a sole source basis. 120-1.5404 Representation (a) The following procedures are designed to assist'the NRC contracting
- officer in determining whether situations or relationships exist which may constitute organizational conflicts of interest with respect to a particular offeror or contractor.
l (b) Representation procedure. The following organizational conflicts of interest representation provision shall be included in all solicitations and unsolicited proposals for: (1) Evaluation services or activities; (2) technical consulting and management support services; (3) research; and (4) other contractual situations where special organizational conflicts of interest provisions are noted in the solicitation and would
- be included in toe resulting contract. This representation requirement shall also apply to all modifications for additional effort under the contract except those issued under the " changes" clause. Where, however, a statement of the type required by the organizational conflicts of interest representation provision has previously been submitted with regard to the contract being modified, only an updating of such statement shall be required.
O s t _ . . . _ - . _ _ . - _ . _ _ _ . _ . _ _ . _ _ . _ . _ _ _ . - _ . . _ . , ~ . ~ . - _ , _ , . . -_._..-__,.m__. . - .
- RS-RES-84-128 Page 104 -
7590-01 I ORGANIZATIONAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST REPRESENTATION I represent to the best of my knowledge and belief that: l The award to of a contract or the modification of an existing contract does ( ) or does not ( ) involve situations or relationships j of the type set forth in 41 CFR'l20-1.5403(b)(1). Instructions to offerors. The following shall be included in I (c) , all NRC solicitations: (1) If the representation as completed indicates } that situations or relationships of the type set forth in 41 CFR
- 5 20-1.5403(b)(1) are involved, or the contracting officer otherwise i
determines that potential organizational conflicts exist, the offeror shall provide a statement in writing which describes in a concise manner all relevant facts bearing on his representation to the contracting officer. If the contracting officer determines that organizational conflicts exist, the following actions may be taken: (1) Impose appropriate conditions which avoid such conflicts. (ii) disqualify the offeror, or (iii) detennine that it is otherwise in the best interest of the United States to seek award of the contract under the waiver provisions of 5 20-1.5411. (2) The refusal to provide the representation required by i 20-1.5404(b) or upon request of the contracting officer the facts required by '520-1.5404(c), shall result in disqualification of the offeror for award. The nondisclosure or misrepresentation of any' relevant interest may also result in the disqualification of the offeror for award; or if such nondisclosure or misrepresentation is discovered after award, the resulting contract may be terminated. The offeror may also be disqualified o from subsequent related NRC contracts and be subject to such other remedial actions provided by law or the resulting contract. (d) The offeror may, because of actual or potential organizational [ t' conflicts of interest, propose to exclude specific kinds of work from the~ statements of work contained in a RFP unless the RFP specifically prohibits such exclusion. Any such proposed exclusion by an offeror l will be considered by the NRC in the evaluation of proposals. If the NRC considers the proposed excluded work to be an essential or integral l part of the required work and its exclusion would work to the detriment of the competitive posture of the other offerers, the proposal must be j rejected as unacceptable. (e) The offeror's failure to execute the representation required by subsection (b) above with respect to invitation for bids will be considered to be a minor informality, and the offeror will be permitted to correct the omission. I 20-1.5405 Contract clauses s 20-1.5405-1 General contract clause , f
- -... - - - - -~ - , - . - , , . - . , , , , , . . - - - _ - - - - - - - - _ . . - - .--
[ RS-RES-84-128 Page 105 7590-01 l . All contracts of the types set forth in i20-1.5404(b) shall include the following clauses: l (a) Purpose. The primary purpose of this clause is to aid in ~; ensuring that the contractor: (1) is not placed in a conflicting role because of current or planned interest (financial, contractual, organizational, or othemise) which relate to the work under this contract, and (2) does not obtain an unfair competitive advantage over other parties by virtue of its performance of this contract. (b) Scope. The restrictions described herein shall apply to performance or participation by the contractor as defined in 41 CFR S 20-1.5402(f) in the actitities covered by this clause. (c) Work for others. Notwithstanding any other provision of this contract, during the term of this contract, the contractor agrees to
- forego entering into consulting or other contractaal arrangements with any firm or organization, the result of which may give rise to a conflict of interest with respect to the work being perfomed under this contract.
The contractor shall ensure that all employees, who are employed full time under this contract and employees designated as key personnel, if any, under this contract abide by the provision of this clause. If the contractor believes with respect to itself or any such employee that any proposed consultant or other contractual arrangement with any firm or organization may involve a potential conflict of interest, the contractor shall obtain the written approval of the contracting officer prior to execution of such contractual arrangement. (d) Disclosure after award. -(1) The contractor warrants that to the best of its knowledge and belief and except as otherwise set forth in this contract, it does not have any organizational conflicts of interest, as defined in 41 CFR 520-1.5402(a). (2) The contractor agrees that if after award it discovers organizational conflicts of interest with respect to this contract, it shall make an insnediate and full disclosure in writing to the contracting officer. This statement shall include a description of the action which the contractor has taken or proposes to take to avoid or mitigat,e such conflicts. The NRC may, however, teminate the contract for convenience if it deems such termination to be in the best interests of the government. (e) Access to and use of information. (1) If the contractor in
; the perfomance of this. contract obtains access to infomation, such as NRC plans, policies, reports, studies, financial plans, internal data protected by the Pr.ivacy Act of 1974 (Pub. L. 93-579), or data which has not been released to the public, the cohtractor agrees not go: (1) Use j -
such releasedinformation for any(private to the public; ii) competepurpose for workuntil theComission for the infomationbased has been
. . .g.
4 ,
-n--,-,., --, . ..- -- --- - - -
l . . . . RS-RES-84-128 Page 106 . 7590-01 on such information for a period of six (6) months after either the completion of this contract or the release of such information to the public, whichever is first, (iii) submit an unsolicited proposal to the government based on such information until one year after the release of such information to the.public, or (iv) release the information without prior written approval by the contracting officer unless such information has previously been released to the public by the NRC.' (2) In addition, the contractor agrees that to the extent it receives or is given access to proprietary data, data protected by the Privacy Act of 1974 (Pub. L. 93-579), or other confidential or privileged technical, business, or financial information under this contract, the contractor shall treat such information in accordance with restrictions placed on use of the information. I (3) The contractor shall have,. subject to patent and security - provisions of this contract, the right to use technical data it produces under this contract for private purposes provided that all requirements of this contract have been met. (f) Subcontracts. Except as provided in 41 CFR 520-1.5402(h), the contractor shall include this clause, including this paragraph, in subcontracts of any tier. The terms " contract," " contractor," and 4
" contracting officer,"* shall be appropriately modified to preserve the -
government's rights. l (g) Remedies. For breach of any of the above proscriptions or for intentional nondisclosure or misrepresentation of any relevant interest . required to be disclosed concerning this contract or for such erroneous representations as necessarily imply bad faith, the government may f. terminate the contract for default, disqualify the contractor from l- subsequent contractual efforts, and pursue other remedies as may be permitted by law or this contract. i (h) Waiver. A request for waiver under this clause shall be directed in writing through the contracting officer to the Executive Director for Operations (EDO) in accordance with the procedures outlined i in i20-1.5411. l20-1.5405-2 Special contract provisions. (a) If it is determined from the nature of the proposed contract that organizational conflicts of interest exist, the contracting officer may determine that such conflict can be avoided or af ter ootaining a waiver in accordance with 520-1.5411, neutralized through the use of an appropriate special contract provision. If appropriate, the offeror may negotiate the terms and conditions of these clauses, including the extent and time period of any such restriction. These provisions include but are not limited to: - I s ,, ,. - --- -,-----.,-a--,---,- g- ,,,m a - - , - --- ,-,,,w,,-,-- ---w,-n--,ww , , , , ,, - - - - -----,-.--,--,-e- -,wm-e-, ~<-e
RS-RES-84-128
#9 7ko-01 (1) Hardware exclusion clauses which prohibit the acceptance of production contracts following a related nonproduction contract previously performed by the contractor; (2) Software exclusion clauses; (3) Clauses which require the contractor (and certain of his key personnel) to avoid certain organizational conflicts of interest; and (4) Clauses which provide for protection of confidential data and guard against its unauthorized use.
(b) The following additional contract clause may be included as section (1) in the clause set forth in : 20-1.5405-1 when it is determinee that award of a follow-on contract would constitute an organizational conflict of interest. (i) Follow-on effort. (1) The contractor shall be ineligible to participate in NRC contracts, subcontracts, or proposals therefor (solicited or unsolicited) which stem directly from the contractor's performance of work under this contract. Furthermore, unless so directed in writing by t the contracting officer, the contractor shall not perform any technical consulting or management support services work or evaluation activities under this contract on any of its products or services or the products or services of another firm if the contractor has been substantially involved in the development or marketing of such products or services. I (2) If the contractor under this contract prepares a complete or essentially complete statement of work or specifications, the contractor i shall be ineligible to perform or participate in the initial contractual i effort which is based on such statement of work or specifications. The contractor shall not incorporate its products or services in such statement of work or specifications unless so directed in writing by the contracting officer, in which case the restriction in this subparagraph shall not apply. (3) Nothing in this paragraph shall preclude the contractor from offering or selling its standard commercial items to the government. 5 20-1.5406 Evaluation, findings, and contract award The contracting officer will evaluate all relevant facts submitted by an offeror pursuant to the representation requirements of $20-1.5404(b) and other relevant information. After evaluating this information l ~ agains*t the criteria of J 20-1.5403, a finding will be made by the contracting officer whether organizational conflicts of interest exist with respect to a particular offeror. If it has oeen cetermined tnat conflicts of interest exist, tnen tne contracting of ficer shall eitner: (a) Disqualify,tne offeror from award,
. .. 10 l _,' _ _ - . _ . _ - . - _ _ _ _._. _ _ _ _ , . . . _ , _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ , _ _ _ _ _ , _ , _ _ _ _ _ _ _ , _ _ _ _ _
RS-RES-84-128 Page 108 - 7590-01 . (b) Avoid or eliminate such con.flicts by appropriate measures; or (c) Award the contract under the waiver provision of 520-1.5411. 520-1.5407 Conflicts identified after award. If potential organizational conflicts of interest are identified af ter award with respect to a particular contractor, the contracting officer determines that such conflicts do, in fact, exist and that it would not be in the Dest interests of the government to terminate the contract as provided in the clauses required by 520-1.5405, the contracting officer will take every reasonable action to avoid, eliminate, or, after obtaining a waiver in accordance with 520-1.5411, neutralize the effects of the identifled conflict. . 520-1.5408 (Reserved) 4 520 1.5409 (Reserved) . 120-1.5410 Subcontracts The contrdcting officer shall recuire offerors and contractors to submit ~a representation statement in accordance with ! 20-1.5404(b) from subcontractors and consultants. The contracting officer shall require the contractor to include contract clauses in accordance with 120-1.5405 in consultant agreements or subcontracts involving performance of work under a prime contract covered by this subsection. . I20-1.5411 Vaiver In the first instance, determination with respect to the need to seek a waiver for specific contract awards shall be made by the contracting officer with the advice and concurrence of the program office director l~ and the Office of Executive Legal Director. Upon the recommendation of I. the contracting officer, and af ter consultation with the Office of the General Counsel, the E00 may waive the policy in specific cases if he determines that 'it is in the best interest of the United States to do so. Such action shall be strictly limited to those situations in which: (1) The work to be performed under contract is vital to the NRC program; (2) the work cannot be satisfactorily performed except by a contractor whose interests give rise to a question of conflict of interest; and (3) contractual and/or technical review and supervision methods can be employed by NRC to neutralize the conflict. For any such waivers, the justification and approval occuments shall be placed in the Public Document Room. l l 11 l l
RS-RES-84-128 Page 109 7590-01 520-1. 5412 Remedies In addition to such other remedies as may be permitted by law or contract f6r a breach of the restrictions in this subpart or for any intentional misrepresentation or intentional nondisclosure of any relevant interest required to be provided for this section, the NRC may debar the contractor from subsequent NRC contracts.
~
Dated at Washinoton. 0.C this 27th day of March 1979. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission S, ~ C8 oudh . Chilk G i & ._ ' '
. Samuel Secretary of the Comission l
l 1 a
, . 12-
. - RS-RES-84-128 Page 110 _
ATTACHMENT 3 (REVISE 0 - 2/82) BILLING INSTRUCTIONS FOR NRC COST-TYPE CONTRACTS General. The contractor shall submit vouchers for cost-reimbursement in the manner and format described herein and as illustrated in the sample voucher. Number of Copies._. An original and four copies should be mailed to the NRC office identified below. . Frecuency. The contractor shall submit claims for reimbursement once each month unless otherwise authorized by the Contracting Officer. Form. Claims shall be submitted on the Form DC-3 " Voucher for Purchases and Services Other Than Personal." These forms are available from the Contracting Officer. (The instructions for preparation and itemization of the voucher are shown on the form.) Billino of Costs Afte'r Expiration of Contract. If costs are incurred during the contract period and claimed after the contract has expired, the peric: during which these costs were incurred must be cited. Currency. Billings may be expressed in the currency normally used by tne contractor in maintaining his accounting records; payments will be, made in that currency. However, the U. S. dollar equivalent for all invoices paid under the contract may not exceed the total U. S. dollars authorized in the contract. Supersession. These instructions supersede all previous billing instructions.
- , ---.,v- - - - , - . , - . - - - . - ,
RS-RES-84-128 Page 111
~
INSTRUCTIONS FOR PREPARING COST INFORMATION FOR NRC CONTRACT 5 Preparation and Itemiration of the Voucher. The contractor shall furnish the information set forth in the explanatory notes below. These notes are keyed to the entries on the sample voucher. Payor's Name and Address. (i) Address the original voucher (pith 4 copies) to: U.5. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Division of Accounting. Office of the Controller. ATTN: GOV /COM Accounts Section. Washington, D.C. 20555. Any questions regarding vouchers yet to be paid by the NRC should be addressed to Division of Accounting (301-492-8010). Any questions regarding vouchers for which payment has been received (either in full or partially with suspensions or disallowances) should be ad-dretsed to the Contracting Officer. Payee's Name and Address. Show the name of the contractor as it appears in the contract and its correct address; except when an approved assign-ment has been made by the contractor, or a different payee or addressee has been designated. then insert the name and address of the payee. Indicate the individual responsible for answering any questions NRC may have regarding the invoice (name and phone number). (a) Contract Number _ - Insert the NRC contract number. l (b) Title of Project - List the full title of the project being performed unser this contract. (c) Voucher Number - Insert the appropriate Contractors serial number ofalso may the voucher include beginning with 001 for this contract. l individual internal accounting numbers in addition to the three digit
- number.
Insert the date the voucher is p*epared. (d) Date of Voucher - (e) ' Contract Amount - Insert the total estimated cost cf the contract, exclusive of fixed-fee. (f) Fixed Fee - Insert total fixed-fee (where appli, cable), (g) Billino Period - Insert the beginning and ending dates (day, month, f and year) of the period in which costs were incurred and for which j reimbursement is claimed. . e e
-2 l
l \ - 6
.-ww,-,-------- , - ,--. - .,-- ,~--~_.,,..-.-,.....,.,.--.-,--,-.*------,---e-.--
- RS-RES-84-128 Pags 112 ._
(h) Direct Costs - Insert the major cost elements.
- Ofrect Labor _ - This consists of salaries and wages paid (or (1) accrued) for direct performance of the contract itemized as follows:
Cumulative Labor Labor Hours Total Hours Billed Category _ Negotiated Name Hours Billed Rate _ (2) Fringe Benefits - This represents fringe benefits Where aapplicable rate is used, to direct labor and Fringebilled as a direct benefits cost. in direct labor should included indicate the rate. not be identified here. (3) Capitalized Nonexpendable Ecutoment - For educational institu-tions list each item costing 5500 or more, and having a life expect-ancy of more than one year. For contractors other than educational institutions list each item costing $200 or more, and having a life List only those items of equipment expectancy of more than one year. A reference shall be made to for thewhich reimbursement following is requested.(1) the item number for the specific (as applicable): piece of equipnent listed in the property schedule of the contract; . (2) the Contracting Officer's approval letter if the equipment is .: not covered by the property schedule; or (3) be preceded by an ast-erisk (*) if the equipment is below the approval level. Further itemization of vouchers shall only be required for items having specific limitations set forth in the contract. (4) Materials, Supplies, and Noncapitalized Equipment - These are consumable materials and supplies and equipment other than that described in (3) above. (5) premium Pay - This is remuneration in excess of the basic hourly rate. (Requires written approval of Contracting Officer.) (6) Consultants' Fee - The supporting information must include the name, nourly or daily rate of the consultant and reference the NRC approval (if not specifically approved in the original contract). (7) Travel - Domestic travel is travel within the United Statps, its territories, possessions, and Canada; it should be billed t Travel costs billed will provide separately from foreign travel . for individual per Diem, and all supporting information for each trip taken.
RS-RES-84-128 Page 113 All costs associated with each trip must be shown f n the following
- format: (unless the organization's travel policy has been negotiated and approved by NRC)
Date Traveler Destination Purpose Cost From o To, From M.
- 1. Airfare
- 2. Rental Car
- 3. Local Travel 4 Per Diem Days 9 =
- 5. Meal s :
- 4 Date Breakfast Lunch Dinner
- If not included in Per Otem.
- 6. Tips, Misc.
(Itemize if more than 510,00) (8) Subcontracts - Include all costs paid to approved subcontractors during billing period. This includes the details of the subcontract terms (i.e., cost-plus-fixed-fee, direct labor, indirect costs, travel, profit, etc.) (9) Other - List all other direct costs by cost elements and dollar amount s epa ra tel y. (1) Indirect Costs--Overhead - Cite the formula (rate and base) in effect during the time the cost was incurred and for which reimbursement is claimed. (j) Fixed-Fee - If the contract provides for a fixed-fee, it must be claimed as provided for by the contract. Cite the formula or ' method of computation. Contractor may bill for fixed fee only up to 85% of total fee. Amount Billed for Current Period Insert the amount billed for the majo-(k) cost elements, adjustment, and adjusted amounts for the period. (1) Cumulative Anount from inception to Date of this 81111no - Insert the cumulative amounts billed for the major cost elements and adjusted amounts claimed during }his contract. (m) Total Amounts Claimed _ - Insert the total amounts claimed for the current and cumulative periods. (n) Adjustments - This includes amounts conceded by the contractor, outstand-ing suspensions, and disapprovals subject to appeal. (o) Grand Totals 9 0 0 9
.,....,_--r --- , - - - - . - , , . - - - . - . , , -
RS-RES-84-128 - Page 114 WuCHLRS FOR ruRLHASLS Ar.0 SLRVICL5 U1HLR 1HAN FLR$0NAL
~
SAMPLE VOUCHER Payor's Name and Address. (a) Contract Nurter NRC-10-81-62a The U. 5. Nuclear Regulatory Congnission (b) Title of Project " Study of Nuclear Weste Division of Accounting. CON g " *
- P t ' ,,
Attention: GOV /Com Acets Section Washington, D. C. 20555 Payee's Name and Address 003 (c) Voucher Number ABC LUMVUKAT10h The Nati1r* 1 Sank. 10/18/82 100 Main Street or Anywhere. U.S. A. (d) Date Voucher Prepared l Anywhere , U.S. A. Assignee for ABC CORP. Anywhere. U.S.A. (e) Total Estimated Cost of Contract (When Payments Assigned) 5350,000.00 Individual to Contact (f) Total Fixed-Fee Regarding This Voucner: $17.500.00
'Name:
Harry Murphy
- Tel. No.: 215-321-8654 3/1/82 thru 3/30/82 -
l(g) This voucher represents reimburseable costs from I Amount Billed-(L) Current Peried (1) Inception to Date
](h) Direct Costs $2.400 $6.800 (1) Direct Labor *-
(2) Frince Benefits e 16.5 600 1.200 (if comouted as percentace)
' (3).. Capital 12eo honexpenoable 5.000 S.000 Ecuiement *
(4) ttaterials. Supplies anc 2.000 4.000 Nencacitali:ed Ecuipment
- 150 100 l
(5) Fre m e Fas 100 100 (6) Censultants = 200 000 (7) T ravel - Domest'c
- i Foreien
- 200 200 (S) Subcontract
- 3.000 9.000 I, (9) Otner Costs * ** ** ' I l (1) INDIRECT COSTS A) Overneae 100_*. of Total Direct Costs 513.600 $29.6 9 ,
(Indicate Base) i
. 52".200 559.300 1
' Suetotal 6.450 i 3.26: l B) General & Adr inistrative Expense j 123 of Cost Elements Nos.1-9. A $30.464 $65.750 , Total Costs 1.523 3.2N (j) FIXE 0-FEE EARNED (Formula) IP 150 33I 987 (m) Total Amounts Claimed (n) Adjustments 1.700 1.'00 Outstanding Suspensions .
$30.2S7 Sy.250 (o) Grand Totals _
i
* (RE0V!RES SUPPORTING INFORMATION.) --
l (SEE ATTACHED.) . ! 2/82 OC-3
-5 i
l l l
RS-RES-84-128 SAMPLE Page 115 SUPPORTING INFORMATION
- 1) Direct Labor - $2400 Hours Cumulative Labor Labor Hours . Hours Billed Category Negotiated Name Billed Rate Total _
$14.00 $1400 975 Senior Engineer 1 2400 Bill Smith 100 50 $10.00 $500 465 Engineer 1500 Al Jones Mike Kelly -100 $5.00 $500 320 Computer Analyst 700 T2T55
- 3) Capitalized Nonexpendable Equipment Spectrometer - General Electric (as approved in Property Schedule) $5",000
- 4) Materials. Supplies & Noncapitalized Eouipment
= $1100.00 10 Radon Tubes 9 5110.00
= $900.00 6 Pairs Electrostatic Gloves 9 $150.00 52000.00
- 5) Premium Pay Walter Murphy - 10 hours 9 $10.00 Per Hour = $100 (This was approved by NRC in letter dated 3/6/82.)
- 6) Consultants' Fee
= $100 Dr. Carney - 1 hour 9 $100 1
- 7) Travel Purpose Costs i
Traveler Destination Date i From 3 From 3 l Meeting with 1) Airfare $80.00 William King Chicago, Wash., 3/1/82 3/6/82 !L DC Project 2) Rental Car 515.00
- Officer 4) Per Diem - 2 Days 9 $50.00 $100.00 6 ) Tips , Mi sc. 5 5.00 i TOTAL: $200 l
.*b,,*
l i e e t
RS-RES-84-128 Page 116 - 1
- 8) Subcontracts XYZ CORP. (CPFF)
Direct Labor: Dr. Smith - 80 hours 9 $20,00 per hour = $1600.00 0/H 9 50% = $800.00 Travel - 2 Trips - Wash., DC 0 $200 = $400.00 to Boston, MA
=
Profit 9 7% $200.00 TOTAL: N (j) Fixed-Fee (For1nula) (5%)
$350,000 X 5% = $17,500 Total Fixed Fee for this Contract .
$27,200 X 5% = $1360 Fee Billed for this Period (n) Adjustments
$1700 - Indicates amount withheld from voucher #001, now approved by Centracting Officer letter 3/10/82. .
1 a 5 6
-4 , . . - -
.' RS-RES-84-128
, Paga 117 ATTACHMENT 4 .
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION NRC MANUAL Volume: 3000 Information and Foreign Activities Part : 3200 Technical Information and Document Control ADM CHAPTER 3202 PUBLICATION OF UNCLASSIFIED REGULATORY AND TECHNICAL REPORTS PREPARED BY NRC CONTRACTORS, INCLUDING REPORTS PREPARED UNDER OR PURSUANT TO INTERAGENCY AGREEMENTS 3202-01 COVERAGE This chapter and its appendix handbook establish responsibilities , basic . requirements, standards and procedures for the documentation, production and dissemination of regulatory and technical reports prepared by NRC consultants and grantees and by NRC contractors and their subcontractors, including reports prepared under or pursuant to interagency agreements. These reports are hereafter referred to as contractor reports. This chapter does not cover NRC staff-generated documents , NRC docket material, or the documents generated by NRC boards, panels and advisory committees. 3203-02 OBJECTIVES 0 21 To assure production and dissemination of regulatory and technical reports as required by the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974 and the Freedom of Infor1 nation Act. 022 To assure that dissemination of regulatory and technical reports is consistent with requirements for public availability of information on the regu-latory process. 023 To assure that national security, patent rights , copyrights , and commercial proprietary rights are not compromised by the release, distribution, or dissemination of regulatory and technical reports from the NRC. 024 To assure that formal NRC contractor reports will carry the registered NRC designation NUREG/CR as the prime identification. 025 To provide for coordination of press or other media releases. 3202-03 RESPONSIBILITIES AND AUTHORITIES
- 031 The Director, Office of Administration, develops and maintains , in consultation with Directors of Offices and Divisions, NRC standards, proce-dures and guides for the production and dissemination of regulatory and tech-nical contractor reports.
l Approved: April 29,1982 , 1 l l L
RS-RES 128
. Page 118 PUBLICATION OF UNCLASSIFIED REGULATORY AND TECHNICAL REPORTS PREPARED BY NRC CONTRAC-
- TORS, INCLUDING REPORTS PREPARED UNDER OR NRC-3202-032 PURSUANT TO INTERAGENCY AGREEMENTS 032 The Director, Division of Technical Information and Document Control:
- a. develops and administers a central document control system for identifying, printing and distributing contractor reports and responding to requests for them.
- b. develops and maintains guides and standards for the documentation, forinatting, printing, dissemination, and public sale of contractor reports .
- c. assures that a system exists for review of contractor reports for adherence to patent , copyright and security policies prior to dissemination.
! d. establishes and administers interagency agreements necessary for the dissemination and public sale of contractor reports and controls duplication and printing of contractor reports to assure adherence ! to the Government Printing and Binding Regulations issued by the i Joint Committee on Printing (JCP), Congress of the United States ! e. establishes distribution data banks, maintains official standard dis-
! tributaon lists for automatic distneution of centractor reports, and l' controls distribution to assure adherence to the Government Printing and Binding Regulations and the Privacy Act (Title 5. U.S. Code).
033 Directors of Offices and Divisions and Regional Administrators:
- a. establish the contract or Standard Order for Work
- provisions, i including those required by this chapter and its appendix; Chapter NRC-3203, Distribution of Unclassified NRC Staff- and Contractor-Generated Documents and its appendix; Chapter NRC-0260, Printing, r Copying, Graphics and Photography and its appendix; and Chapter NRC-1102, . Procedure for Placement of Work with the Department of Energy. In the Statement of Work:
(1) specify what reports will be reviewed for policy, management, regulatory and legal issues by NRC staff in draft prior to printing and distribution. If the report is to be reviewed by NRC staff, give the conditions under which the contractor may publish documents in the. event of unresolvable differences rela-tive to the draft, including the type of disclaimer to be used in . j addition to the standard government disclaimer (see Exhibit 6). I l (2) provide for the reviews necessary to insure that the national l security, patent rights, copyrights, and commercial proprietary l . rights are .not compromised by the release or dissemination of i the reports. If DOE contractors are to be authorized to make
*In the case of DOE work, this is NRC Form 173, Standard Order for DOE Work. See Chapter NRC-1102.
l Approved: April 29,1982
.i. ~.
S ' RS-RES-84-128
- Page ~119 _
PUBLICATION OF UNCLASSIFIED REGULATORY AND . TECHNICAL REPORTS PREPARED BY NRC CONTRAC-l TORS,' INCLUDING REPORTS PREPARED UNDER OR ~ N RC-3'e02-03,4
- PURSUANT TO INTERAGENCY AGREEMENTS the reviews, designate the contractor officials who are authorized to sign NRC Form 426A prior to NRC distribution of reports (see Appendix Part IV).
' (3) specify that all formal reports carry NUREG/CR. numbers as the prime identification, as illustrated in the appendix. (4) specify whether formal reports shall be printed by NRC or the contractor if the contractor has a JCP-authorized federal print-ing plant (see Appendix, Parts II and IV). (5) specify that all formal reports required by NRC shall be distri-4 buted by NRC.
~
(6) establish the number of copies the contractor may retain or ~ .i request for internal and external distribution and charge against NRC. Written justification must be provided , and approval obtained of the NRC JCP representative (the Director. Division of Technical Infonnation and Document Control) when i the number exceeds the 50 copies authorized by JCP. (7) assure the protection of proprietary infot1 nation, if any, in con'- i tractor reports.
- b. assure adherence to instructions and authorizations regarding the reproduction and- distribution of reports.
J
. c. . recommend standard distribution ~ category (ies) for contractor reports to the Division of Technical Information and Document Control.
~
< d. provide changes to the official standard distribution lists to the
- Division of Technical Information and Document Control.
i
- e. establish procedures for review of contractor's proposed press and other media releases.
t 034 The Director, Office of the Executive Legal Director, provides legal
- . review and advice to NRC staff on questions regarding inventions, patents, and use of copyrighted material.
035 The Director, Office of Public Affairs, upon request of project l manager, reviews proposed contractor's press or other media releases (c: appropriateness. 036 The Director, Division of Security, provides review of reports to assure that national security interests are not compromised by the release. s e Approved: April 29,1982
,,-,.y ,,n.,.,- r.+,,-,-~~m.-w~,.vw -ymg..y----_ - - . -
RS-RES-84-128 . Page 120 ! PUBLICATION OF UNCLASSIFIED REGULATORY AND TECHNICAL REPORTS PREPARED BY NRC CON. TRAC-TORS, INCLUDING REPORTS PREPARED UNDER OR N RC-3202-037 PURSUANT'TO INTERAGENCY AGREEMENTS 037 The Director, Division of Contracts: ).
- a. coordinates the flow of all reports to and from contractors (other than DOE contractors) where such reports may result in alterations in the terms and conditions of applicable contracts as they pertain to report production and distribution.
- b. advises the contractor as to the source and method for obtaining reports required from the government for performance of the ;
contract. l c. provides contractor with copies of NRC Manual Chapters 3202, 3203, 3206 and.0260, when appropriate. .
- d. determines when requests for proposals and invitations for bids, as well as subsequent contracts, should include statements requiring contractor compliance with Chapter NRC-3202 and the Government Printing and Binding Regulations.
3202-04 . DEFIN' ITIONS* l 041 camera-ready copy - pages ready for printing by the offset printing process . This is a colloquial term used even though the printing process may not involve the so-called copy camera (see also reproducible masters). 042 central report control system - means for developing and main-taining the policies , procedures and guides needed to identify and pro-duce regulatory and technical reports and to assure adherence to re-quirements and standards for documentation, formatting, printing and 2 distribution. ' 043 commercial proprietary right - privileged or confidential trade secrets , and commercial or financial data. l 044 contractor report - record of work done (a document) prepared in accordance with the provisions of a contract or under or pursuant to an inter-i agency agreement. l, 045 copyright - a form of protection provided by the laws of the United (, States (Title 17, U.S. Code) to the authors of " original works of authorship" including literary, dramatic; musical,I artistic, and certain other intellectual works. This protection is available to both published and unpublished works. Copyrighted material may not be reproduced without the permission of the [ author or publisher. 046 disseminate - to announce the publication of reports and make them available for free distribution, sale or copying.
- f. *Words underscored in definitions are also defined in list.
l* Approved: April 29,1982
. s RS-RES-84-128 -
Page 121 PUBLICATION OF UNCLASSIFIED REGULATORY AND - TECHNICAL REPORTS PREPARED BY NRC CONTRAC-TORS, INCLUDING REPORTS PREPARED UNDER OR PURSUANT TO INTERAGENCY AGREEMENTS N RC-3202-047 047 distribute - to dispense reports to specific organizations and indi-viduals to assure their participation in the regulatory process and support of research and technological investigations. Such distribution may be accomp-lished by the use of standard distribution data banks established and main-tained, by the Division of Technical Information and Document Control based on the requests of the originating Office or Division. 048 documentation - classification and associated required markings, the NRC report number unique to the report, title (and subtitle, if any), author or correspondent (if any), organization identification and contract number (or interagency agreement number), date and availability. 049 draft or final material for inclusion in " Safety Evaluation Reports" or
" Environmental Statements" (ES) - written matertal requested for input to SERs ,
or ESs to be issued as NUREGs. Such material may be edited or modified at the discretion of the NRC staff. 0410 formal technical reports - the final product of research, an origmal investigation, or a significant compilation of information. This product is a fomal technical report for publication in the NUREG/CR series. For extensive long-tenn projects, fomal monthly, quarterly or semiannual and annual periodic technical reports may be required. A draft of the final or periodic report may be requested for review prior to preparation of the camera-ready copy. 0411 NRC project manager - the NRC staff member responsible for the work performed by a consultant or a contractor and his subcontractor, or for work perfonned under or pursuant to an interagency agreement. 0412 patent review - examination by legal staff to assure protection rights in inventions. 0413 publicly available documents - information (reports) which is avail-able in the NRC Public Document Room (PDR) for public inspection and copying. 0414 regulatory and technical documents - information (reports) that has been prepared tn support of regulatory and technical investigations and is to become a publicly available record 0415 reproducible masters - camera-ready copy which includes (1) originals of line drawmgs (or prints that can be copted), (2) glossy prints of black and white photographs (colored photographs cannot be reproduced), (3) original typed or printed text, tables, cover, title page, contents and abstract, or (4) other forms of the materials listed in (1), (2) and (3) that a printer can reproduce. 0416 technical reports - infonnation on the echnical aspects of contract work. These may be interim or final technical letter repor' > , draft or final formal technical reports for publication in the NUREG/CR Sties, or draft or IUial material for tnclusion in SERs or ESs. . Approved: April 29,1982
RS-RES-84-128 Page 122 ' PUBLICATION OF UNCLASSIFIED REGULATORY AND i . TECHNIC AL REPOttTS PREPARED BY NRC CONTR AC-TORS, . !NCLllislNG REPORTS PREPARED UNDER OR i NRC-3202-0417 PURSUANT TO INTERAGENCY AGREEMENTS 1 0417 technical letter reports - imerina si Imal letters that provide mforina-tion on the technical aspects of cor.trict work. Interim technical letter reports may be required at various stage = of 4 project. These reports usually are followed by a final technical letter report or a formal technical report. Final technical letter reports are usually specified in situations- where the technical-work is review and evaluation of work of others or work to be used by the staff in the licensing and regulation process. Interim letter reports may include, but are not limited to, informal (interim) progress reports, quick-look reports, data reports, status summary reports, project descriptions, pre-tested predic-tions, model verifications, experiment safety analyses, experiment operatmg procedures, facility certification rep.rts, and test result reports. 0418 unique identification - N8C identification used on a report and its attachments. revisions, and suppleatuss that is not used on any other report. 3202-05 BASIC REQUIREMENTS 051 !.3plicability. The provisions of this chapter and its appendix apply to NRC coiBultantr, grantees, contractors and subcontractors, including those working under interagency agreements, whose contracts require the prepara-
- tion of regulatory c.nd technical reports Because of the unique requirements of NRC boards, panels and advisory committees which report directly to the Commission, the handling of reports prepared by consultants and contractors to them are governed ' by the Board or Panel Chairman and, in the case of advisory committees, by the Advisory Committee Management Officer.
052 Forms. NRC Form 426A. " Publication Release for Unclassified NRC Contractor and Consultant Reports" (Exhibit 5) and NRC Form 335, "Biblio-graphic Data Sheet" (Exhibit 7) shall be used as provided in the appendix. 053 Appendix 3202. This appendix contains standards and procedures for t the preparation of reporting requirement portions of Statements of Work, and for the documentation, production, and dissemination of regulatory and tech-nical reports that are to be made publicly available and are prepared by con-tractors and other government agencies in accordance with contract require-ments or interagency agreements. 054 Preparation Requirements,
- n. Reports to be Printed by NRC. All contractor reports to be printed by NRC shall be prepared according to Appendix 3202. The repro-ducible masters for the requisite distribution shall be transmitted to the Division of Technical Information ' and Document Control accompanied by completed NRC Form 426A and NRC Form 335.
- b. Reports Prmted by Authorized Federal PrintingPlants. All contractor reports to be prmted by the contractor (as specified by the con-tract, agreement, or standard order for work) shall be prepared according to Appendix 3202, and a reproducible master and suffi-cient copies for standard and incidental distribution shall be supplied
~
Approved: April 29,1982 e s y
RS-RES-84-128 Page 123 - PUBLICATION OF UNCLASSlFIED REGULATORY AND - TECHNICAL REPORTS PREPARED BY NRC CONTRAC- - TORS, INCLUDING REPORTS PREPARED UNDER OR NRC-3202-%5 PURSUANT TO INTERAGENCY AGREEMENTS to the Division of Technical Information and Document Control acecm-panied by completed NRC Form 426A, signed by the authorized son-tractor official. Each such report shall include, .as the last page, a completed NRC Form 335. 055 References. The NRC manual chapters referenced are available from
' the Division of Technical Information and Document Control. The other publi~-
cations are available from the locations given in the citation.
- a. Manual Chapter NRC-0260, " Printing , Copying , Graphics and Photography. "
- b. Manual Chapter and Appendix NRC-2101, "NRC Security Program."
~
- c. Manual Chapter NRC-3203, " Distribution of Unclassified NRC Staff- .
and Contractor-Generated Documents."
- d. Manual Chapter NRC-1102, " Procedure for Placement of Work with DOE . "
, e. Manual Chapter NRC-3206, "NRC Contractor Unclassified Papers, Journal Articles and Media Releases on Regulatory and Technical Subjects."
- f. Title 44, U.S. Code, "Public . Printing and -Documents ," Government Printing Office.
- g. Government Printing and Binding Regulations of the Joint Committee on Printing, Congress of the United States, No. 24 April 1977 (JCP Regulations), Government Printing Office.
l
- h. Title 5, U.S. Code, " Government Organization and Employees,"
Government Printing Office.
- i. Savolainen et al. , " Technical Writing Style Guide," U.S. NRC Report NUREG-0656"Tovember 1979. Available from NRC/GPO Sales Program.
l l l l l i l I f [ Approved: April 29,1982 l 4 _m. _ _ _ _ _ . _ - , _ _ _ _ _ . , , - , - , - . . - - _ _ _ . _ . - - _ _ _ _ . _ . __
4 . RS-RES-84-128 Page 124 - PUBLICATION OF tfNCI.ASSIFIED IWGULATORY AND - TECHNICAL REPORTS PREPARED 'BY NRC CONTRAC-TORS. INCLUDING REPORTS PREPARED UNDER OR PURSUANT TO INTER AGENCY AGREEMENTS NRC Appendix _3y)2 CONTENTS PART I PREPARATION OF REPORTING-REQUIREMENTS PORTIONS OF STATEMENTS
- OF WORK FOR CONTRACTS, GRANTS AND STANDAR0 ORDERS FOR 00E WORK PAGE A. LIST OF TECHNICAL REPORT REQUIREMENTS......................... 1 2
- 8. REQUIREMENTS FOR FORP4AL REPORTS.................... .........
2 C. REQUIREMENTS FOR ORAFT REP 0RTS................................ PU8LISHING IN OPEN LITERATURE AND PRESENTING PAPERS........... 3
- 0. *
- .s
........ 4 E. TYP0 GRAPHY...........................................
F. REPORTS CONTAINING. PROPRIETARY INFORMAT10N.................... 4 4 G. DISTRIBUTION OF REPORTS TO CONTRACTORS........................ H. C00R0! NATION OF PRESS OR OTHER ME0!A RELEASES................. 4 PART II FORMALCONTRACTORREPORTSTOBEPRINTEDBYNRC................7 7 A. DOCUMENTATION................................................. Applicability............................................ 7 1. 7
- 2. Front Cover and Title Page...............................
Availability Information................................. 9 3.
.4 . Disclaimer............................................... 9 Previous Documents in Series............................. 9 5.
9
- 6. Abstract.................................................
- 7. References and Bibliographies............................ 10 Bibliographic Data Sheet................................. 10 8.
PATENT AND SECURITY REVIEWS.. ................................ 10 8. Patent Review......... .................................. 10 1. Security Review...... ................................. 10
- 2. .
11
'C. PPOCEDURES FOR PRINTING AND 0!STRIBUTING......................
Printing............ .... ............................. 11 1. Reprinting.................................... .......... 11 2. 11
- 3. Distribution of Reports..................................
f-i Approved: April 29,1982
RS-RES-84-128 Page 125 PUBLICATION OF UNCLASSIFIED REGULATORY AND TECHNICAL REPORTS PREPARED BY NAC CONTRAC-TORS, INCLUDING REPORTS PREPARED UNDER OR NRC Appendix 3202 PURSUANT TO INTERAGENCY AGREEMENTS CONTENTS (Centinued)
- PAGE EXHIBITS A
- 1. Sample Cover for Unclassified Formal Contractor-Prepared Reports, Excluding Those Printed by DOE Laboratories with JCP Authorized Federal Printing Plants........................................... 13
- 2. Sample Title Page for Unclassified Formal Contractor-Prepared Reports, Excluding Those Printed by DOE Laboratories with JCP Authorized Federal Printing Plants................................ 14
- 3. Sample Cover for Unclassified Formal Reports Printed by DOE Laboratories with JCP Authorized Federal Printing Plants.......... 15
- 4. Sample Title Pages for Unclassified Formal Reports Printed ,
by DOE Laboratories with JCP Authorized Federal Printing Plants............................................................ 16
- 5. NRC Form 426A, Publications Release............................... 17
- 6. Disclaimer and Availability Statements............'................ 18
- 7. NRC Form 335, B.ibliographic Data Sheet............................ 19 PART III TECHNICAL LETTER REP 0RTS-.................................... 21 A. F02 MAT....................................................... 21
[ ~ 1. 2. Applicability........................................... Requirements............................................ 21 21 t l l B. PATENT AND SECURITY REVIEWS................................ 21 l i a 1. Patent Review.......................................... 21
- 2. Security. Review........................................ 22 PART IV FORMAL REPORTS TO BE PRINTED FOR THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REGU-LATORY RESEARCH BY DOE LABORATORIES WITH JCP-AUTHORIZED FEDERAL PRINTING PLANTS..................................... 23 A. DOCUMENTATION.... .......................................... 23 l 1. Applicability.......................................... 23 l 2. Front Cover and Title Page............................. 23
- 3. Availability and Price Information..................... 25
- 4. Disclaimer............................................. 25 l 5. Previous Documents in Series........................... 25 l
- 6. Abstract............................................... 26
- 7. References and Bibliographies.......................... 26 t
, ApproveIf: ~ April 29,1982 ii
RS-RES-84-128 -
. Page 126 PUBLICATION OF UNCLASSIFIED REGULATORY AND .
TECHNICAL ~ REPORTS PREPARED BY NRC CONTRAC-TORS. INCLUDING REPORTS PREPARED UNDER OR PURSUANT _ TO INTERAGENCY AGREEMENTS NRC Appendix 3202 CONTENTS (Continued) PAGE B. PATENT AND SECURITY REVIEWS................................. 26
- 1. Patent Review.......................................... 26
- 2. Security Review........................................ 26 C. PROCEDURES FOR PRINTING AND DISTRIBUTING.................... 26
- 1. Printing .............................................. 26
- 2. Reprinting............................................. 27
- 3. Distribution of Reports................................ 27 I
iii Approved: April 29,1982
. - - - = . . - . - -. - _ _ - -
, s .. a RS-RES-84-128 -
Page 127 PUBLICATION OF UNCLASSIFIED llEGULATORY AND , TECHNICAL ~ REPORTS PREPARED BY NRC CONTRAC-TORS, INCLUDING REPORTS PREPARED l'NDER OR
.gtRSU ANT TO INTER AGENCY AGREEMENTS N RC . Appe,ndi3.,3%02 , l' ART !
I PREPARATION OF REPORTING-REQltIREMENT PORTIONS OF ^ STATEMENTS OF WORK FOR CONTRACTS, GRANTS AND STANDARD ORDERS FOR DOE WORK A. LIST OF TECHNICAL REPORT REQUIREMENTS g List the technical reports required from each project, task or subtask, as applicable. State when and to whom they should be submitted and what they should contain. The followmg definitions describe the types of reports that may be specified: technical reports - information on the technical aspects of contract work. These may be interim or final technical letter reports, draft - or final formal technical reports for publication in the NUREG/CR series , or draft or fmal m,uterial for inclusion in SERs or ESs (see definitions below). technical letter reports - interim or final letters that provide informa-tion on the technteal aspects of the contract work. Intertm technical letter reports may be required at various stages of a project. These interim letters usually are followed by a final technical letter report or a formal technical report. Final technicalletter reports are usually specified in situations where the technical work is review and evalua- i tion of work of others or work to be used by the staff in the licens-ing ~ and regulation process. Interim letter reports may include, but are not limited to, informal (interim) progress reports, quick-look reports, data reports, status summary reports, project descriptions, pre-test predictions, model verifications, experiment safety analyses, experiment operating procedures, facility certification reports, and test' result reports. These reports must be identified with the finan-cial number. (FIN) and the contract number assigned to the project. r formal technical reports - the final product of research, an original l investigation, or a significant compilation of information. This pro-
- i. duct is a formal technical report for publication in the NUREG/CR l series. For extensive long-term projects, formal monthly, quarterly
[ or semiannual and annual periodic technical reports may be required. A draf t of the final or periodic report may be requested for review
# prior to preparation of the camera-ready copy.
draf t or final material' for inclusion in SERs or ESs - written mate-rial requested for mput to SERs to ESs to be issued as NUREG's.
- Such material may be edited or modified at the discretion of the NRC staff.
f ! For purposes of this Part, contractor means a private contractor, con-sultant, grantee , another State or Federal Agency workmg under an ' interagency agreement, or a DOE / National Laboratory. l. 1 Approved: April 09.1980 I'
. _ , _ . - _ _ _ ._ , ._, _ _ _ - _ - - . _ . - . ., . _ _ . _ _ . , _ _ _ _ - - - _ . - _ _ _ _ . ~ , _ . _ _ - . . . -
RS-RES-84-128
. Page 128 PUBLICATION OF UNCLASSIFIED REGULATORY AND ~
TECHNICAL REPORTS PREPARED BY NRC CONTRAC-NRC Appendix .3202 TORS. INCLUDING REPORTS PREPARED UNDER OR Part I PURSUANT TO INTERAGENCY AGREEMENTS B. REQUIREMENTS FOR FORMAL REPORTS If the contractor is to prepare a final fomal technical report for publica-tion, state that it will be printed and distributed by NRC from camera-ready copy submitted by the contractor, unless the work is being done for the Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research by a DOE Laboratory with a JCP-authorized printing plant. The camera-ready copy is to be pre-pared in accordance with the provisions of this appendix, Part II (for contractors other than DOE contractors) or Manual Chapter 1102 (for DOE contractors). A style guide is also available free, upon request (NUREG-0650). The camera-ready copy is to be submitted by the contractor to the Director. NRC Division of Technical Information and Document Control, Washington , D.C. 20555, by first class mail, for printing and distribu-tion . Reports printed for the Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research should be handled in accordance with Part IV of this appendix and/or Section 12. Exhibit 4, of Manual Chapter 1102. C. REQUIREMENTS FOR DRAFT REPORTS If a draft is desired prior to completion of a final technical letter report, formal technical report, or final material for inclusion in an SER or ES, state that requirement and the time frame for delivering the final camera-ready copy after receiving NRC comments on the draft. State that all draft material should be submitted to the cognizant project manager. When the contractor is to submit draft material for review prior to the preparation of final report, state that if there are NRC comments the contractor will be asked to make changes. If agreement on the changes is reached, the NRC manager will authorize the contractor to prepare the final copy and submit it to the project manager, if it is a letter !- report or input to an SER or ES, or to the Director, Division of Tech-l- nical Infomation and Document Control. if it is camera-ready copy for printing and distribution. This is to be done to assure proper publica-tion , handling , and distribution and, among other things, to preclude further changes that might nullify the agreement. If caveats were agreed l to and the project manager wishes to check the final document for their l presence, he/she should infom TIDC of that desire. In that case, upon receipt of the camera-ready copy by TIDC, the project manager will be informed and requested to prepare and sign the NRC Form 426A. Also state that if agreement on changes to a formal technical report to be issued in the NUREG/CR series is not reached, the NRC project manager may request the contractor to prepare the camera-ready copy with, in l i addition to the standard disclaimer required on all contractor formal reports (see Exhibit 6), any caveats deemed necessary to cover NRC objections. Such caveats may range from the "The views expressed in l this report are not necessarily those of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory l Commission" to the addition of a preface setting forth the NRC opinion or footnotes at appropriate locations within the text.
. Approved: AprB 29,1982 2
* " RS-RES-84-120
- Page 129 _
PUBLICATION OF UNCLASSIFIED REGULATORY AND i , TECHNICAL REPORTS PREPARED BY NRC CONTRAC- NRC Appendix 3202 TORS INCL,UD!NG REPORTS PREPARED UNDER OR ._P,a r t i PURSif ANT,,TO, IN'liFJAGEN(*Y AGREEMENTS _ _ _ . _ , _ _ _ . , _ , State that if NRC objections cannot be covered in this manner, NRC can refuse to publish the report. In the case of DOE / National Laboratory reports, the DOE Operations Office Manager responsible for that labora-tory should be informed by the NRC Office Director of the decision In and the the reasons therefor, with a copy to the Laboratory Director. case of another Federal agency, a State, or a private contractor, the person who executed the contract. should similarly be informed by the NRC Contracting Officer. The contractor is then free to publish without NRC identification of the report. Project manager or higher level deci-sions may be appealed to the NRC Executive Director for Operations. D. PUBLISHING IN OPEN LITERATURE AND PRESENTING PAPERS If the contractor's principal investigator is to be allowed to publish in - the open literature instead of submitting a final report and/or present - papers at public or association meetings during the course of the work, add the following statement to the Statement of Work: The principal investigator (s) may publish the results of this work in the open literature instead of submitting a final report and/or present papers at public or association meetings at interim stages of the work.
~
If the project manager wants to review the paper or journal articles prior to presentation or submission for publication, state this in the Statement of Work, as follows: The principal investigator (s) may publish the results of this work in the open literature instead cr submitting a final report and/or present papers at public or association meetings at interim stages of the work, if the article or paper has been reviewed by the NRC project manager in draft form and agreement has been reached on the content. The applicable procedures set forth in Chapters NRC-3206 or NRC-1102 must be followed. If agreement is not reached, NRC may also ask that the paper include in addition to the standard statement " Work supported by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ," any caveats deemed necessary to cover NRC objections. If NRC objections cannot be covered in this manner NRC can refuse to authorize publication in ' the open literature and/or presentation of papers. In the latter case, NRC will inform the contractor of the decision, as j stated above for formal reports (see Section C, paragraph 3 and 4). The ' contractor is then free to publish without NRC identification of the information. This will not affect payment of the contract work costs. Project manager or higher level decisions may be appealed to the NRC Executive Director for Operations. If the contractor proposes to publish in the open literature or present the information at meetings in addition to submitting the required tech-nical reports, approval of the proposed article or presentation should be 3 Approved: April 29,198'i p 4
RS-RES-84-128 Page 130 PUBLICATION OF UNCLASSIFIED REGULATORY AND TECHNICAL REPORTS PREPARED BY NRC CONTRAC-NRC Appendix 3202 TORS, INCLUDING REPORTS PREPARED UNDER OR Part ! PURSilANT TO INTERAGENCY AGREEMENTS obtained from the NRC project manager. The NRC manager shall either approve the material as submitted, approve it subject to NRC-suggested revisions, or disapprove it. In any event, a project manager may dis-approve or delay presentation or publication of papers on information that is subject to Commissioner approval that has not been ruled upon or which has been disapproved. (See Manual Chapter 3206 for provisions relating to payment of page charges and travel costs for presentation of papers.) . E. TYPOGRAPHY The text of reports is to be single spaced on 84 x ll-in. paper, unless otherwise specifically authorized. Occasionally, reports with many symbols and mathematical expressions may require one and one-half spacing to provide for superscripts and subscripts. This spacing should be allowed where needed, but should be. considered an exception, not the standard. I F. REPORTS CONTAINING PROPRIETARY INFORMATION .' 1 Proprietary information used in contractor reports must be noted on the cover and title page of the report by placing the word " PROPRIETARY INFORMATION" at the top and bottom on the front cover (if any) other than the cover sheet, title page (if any), the first page of text (if there is no front cover or title page), the outside of the back cover (if any).
' or outside of the back page if there is no back cover. The page(s) con- - taining the proprietary information should also identify that information.
The project manager must be fully informed of this and take responsibil-ity for handling the report and informing TIDC of its proper disposition. G. DISTRIBUTION OF REPORTS TO CONTRACTORS i~ Up to 50 copies of formal technical reports may be retained by or will be l bulk shipped to the contractor by NRC for internal use. Single copies for. specific individuals in organizations other-than the contractor's organiza-tion who are not included in the distribution requested by the NRC f project manager may be requested on a project basis or on a report-by-report basis. The request, with written justification, should be addressed l l to the NRC project manager, with a copy to NRC/TIDC. If the additional
- distribution is approved by the NRC project manager, the contractor shall send these copies (if printing is done by the contractor) and address labels, even if printing is done by NRC, to NRC/TIDC, where the distribution will be made along with the standard distribution.
H. COORDINATION OF PRESS OR OTHER MEDIA RELEASES
-A contractor may request permission to issue a press or other media release on the work . being done. Such request shall be made to the project manager, who will consult with his/her management and with the r'
Office of Public Affairs. The contractor may not issue a press release on nonroutine information without this prior coordination. This coordination l
. Approved: April 29, 1982 4 c . ,
RS-RES-84-128 Paga 131 - PUBLICATION OF UNCI:,ASSIFIED REGULATORY AND . TECHNICAL REPORTS PREPARED BY NRC CONTRAC-TORS. INCLUDING REPORTS PREPARED UNDER OR NRC Appendix 3202 PURSUANT TO INTER AGENCY AGREEMENTS Part I may;be accomplished by telephone, with the NRC project manager respon-sible - for expeditious handling. Decisions not to release information or delays in handling by the project manager may be appealed to the NRC Executive Director for Operations. 9
. ~
5 Approved: AprU 29, 1982
+
(- , RS-RES-84-128 Page 132 _ PUBLICATION OF UNCLASSIFIED REGULATORY AND - TECHNICAL REPORTS PREPARED BY NRC CONTRAC-
- TORS, INCLUDING REPORTS PREPARED UNDER OR PURSUANT TO INTERAGENCY AGREEMENTS NRC Alpendix 3202 PART II FORMAL CONTRACTOR REPORTS TO BE PRINTED BY NRC A. DOCUMENTATION
- 1. Applicability
^
- a. The requirements of this part apply to contractor and inter-agency agreement reports 'that are to be printed by NRC.
Contractors may not print reports prepared for NRC except those DOE- laboratories with JCP-authorized printing plants and then only those prepared for NRC's Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research. .
- b. With respect to classified documents and documents marked Official Use Only, Limited Official Use, Proprietary Infonna-tion , and Safeguards Information, the requirements set forth in this part shall be used in conjunction with Manual Chapter NRC-2101.
- c. The requirements of this part do not apply to consultants and contractors of the NRC boards, panels, and advisory committees which report directly to the Commission.
- 2. Front Cover and Title Page t' a. Separate covers and title pages are required (see Exhibits 1 and 2 for contractor reports and Exhibits 3 and 4 for reports
- prepared under or pursuant to interagency agreements) .*
- b. The items shown in Exhibits 1 through 4 and discussed below shall appear on the title page and cover, as appropriate.**
(1) NRC Report Number. Each report shall be identified by an NRC-controlled alphanumeric number as the prime
' ' number unique to that report. The centralized document control system for unique identification is maintained by
- . the Division of Technical Information and Document Con-trol. Numbers may be obtained by calling the Division of Technical Information and Document Control or by sub-mitting a copy of NRC Form 426A (Exhibit 5) with a request for a number.
Reproducible copy of the cover of the performing organization may be sub-mitted; however, the data elements shown in Exhibit 1 must be included.
' "These requirements meet the specifications of American National Standard ANSI Z39.18-1974, Guidelines for Format and Production of Scientific and Technical Reports, and ANSI 239.23-1974 Technical Report Numbers.
7 Approved: April 29,1982
- - _ _.___2_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ . _ _ . _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . .
RS-RES-84-128-
, Page 133 PUBLICATION OF UNCLASSIFIED REGULATORY AND TECHNICAL REPORTS PREPARED BY NRC CONTRAC-NRC- Appendix 3202 TORS, INCLUDING REPORTS PREPARED UNDER OR Part II PURSUANT TO INTERAGENCY AGREEMENTS The NRC' identification number will have the form:
NUREG/CR-1234 The contravor's report number, if any, may be inserted below the NURFG number on the title page and cover, as shown in ~ Exhib2s 1 through 4, if desired by the contractor. When a report consists of more than one volume or binding or is issued in more than one edition , an appropriate volume , supplement , part or revision designation shall appear immediately below the report number. (2) Title and Subtitle (a) Use a brief title that indicates clearly the subject matter covered in the report. (b) When a report is prepared in more than one volume, repeat the primary title on each volume. (c) If appropriate, show the type of report (e.g. annual report, final report, thesis , etc.) and the period covered as part of the subtitle. (3) Pers3nal Author (s)' Name(s). Authors' name should be given on the title page and cover unless this is impractical, as in the case of annual reports which have many contribu-l . tors . If authors' contributions are as editors, compilers, l ,- etc. , so indicate on the title page following the names. In
' addition, list affiliation of each author only if affiliated with an organization other than the organization generat-ing the -document.
(4) Organization Identification. On the title page and cover, l provide infonnation of the type illustrated in Exhibits 1 L . through 4. (5) Basis for' Report Date(s) [ j (a) The basis for dating may be shown along with the j date on the title page. Various bases for dating are l possible; e.g., date report completed, date reviews l completed , date published , date distributed , etc. l (b) More than one date, with the basis for each, may be l shown where this is necessary. l l . . ' . . ,Abproved: April 29,1982 8
. _ _ . . _ _ _ . . ~ , _ _ . , . . __ . , _ _ , _ . . _ - . , _ , - _ , , , _ , . , . . _ _ . _ - _ , .- .. , - -..
RS-RES-84-128 Pago 134 , PUBLICATION OF.trNCLASSTFIED REGl'!.ATORY AND . TECHNICAL REPORTS PREPARED BY NRC CONTRAC-TORS. INCLUDING REPORTS PREPARED II,NDER OR N Rr' Appe n<tix ':20': Part !! PURSUANT TO INTERACENCY AGREEMENTS
- 3. Availability 1,n_ formation All. formal reports will be made available for sale by NRC and by the. National Technical Information Service (NTIS). The following statements will be inserted on the inside of the front cover (Exhibit 6) by the Division of Technical Information and Document Control:
Available from GPO Sales Program Division of Technical Information and Document Lentrol U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Available from - National Technical Information Service (NTIS) Springfield, Virginia 22161
- 4. Disclaimer The following notice will be added during the printing step on the inside front cover (Exhibit 6): "This report was prepared as an account -of work sponsored by an agency of the United States
. ..- - Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, or any of their employees,- makes any warranty, expressed or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for any third party's use, or the results of such use, of. any information.
apparatus , product or process disclosed in this report, or repre-sents that its use by such third party would not infringe privately owned rights . " The following additional statement. "The views expressed in this report are not necessarily those of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission" will be printed below the standard ! disclaimer, if appropriate. Other qualifying statements may be added, if needed (see Part I.C., Requirements for Draf t Reports).
- 5. Previous Documents in Series If the document being prepared is one in an ongoing series, list all l
previous documents in the series . Include document numbers and issuance dates. Place this list on the back of the title page'.
- 6. Abstract c
{' An abstract of 200 words or less shan be prepared for each formal L report. Within the report, the abstract shall appear on a separate ! page between the list of previous documents in the series and the contents page
- 3 This preferred positioning of the abstract in the report need not be followed' l
' if the style manual of the originating organization requires a different location. 9 App roved - April 29, 1982 L
RS-RES-84-128 Page 135 PUBLICATION OF UNCLASSlFIED REGULATORY AND TECHNICAL REPORTS PREPARED BY NRC CONTRAC-NRC Appendix 3202 , TORS, INCLUDING REPORTS PREPARED UNDER OR Part II PURSUANT TO INTERAGENCY AGREEMENTS
- 7. References and Bibliographies Do not use as reference or bibliographic material any document, personal . communication, letter, memorandum or other material that is not publicly available in written form in the NRC or other govern-ment Public Document Room, in a public library or available from the
, author. State such availability for each entry or collectively for all entries. See NRC " Technical Writing Style Guide" for additional information and examples.
- 8. Bibborraphic Data Sheet NRC Form 335 (Exhibit 7)'shall be prepared and included in the camera-ready copy as the final right-hand page.
B. PATENT AND SECURITY REVIEWS
- 1. Patent Review Patent implications shall be considered prior to' approval of. reports for public release so that disclosure will not adversely affect the patent rights of NRC or the contractor. If the work being reported is contractually managed through another government agency (e.g. ,
DOE laboratories), that government agency should be requested by the contractor to perform the patent review. The result of such review shall be reported on NRC Form 426A in item 11 (Exhibit 5). i-If NRC directly administers the contract or the contractor is unable to obtain a patent clearance from the government agency administer-ing the contract, the responsible NRC contracting officer shall be [ consulted, and the responsible NRC project manager shall consider the patent implications. If there is no need for patent review because of the certainty that the report contains no description of novel technical developments which may be of an inventive nature, NRC Form 426A may be completed with the statement "Not Appli-cable" or "N/A" in the space for the Patent Counsel's signature. If there is a possibility that there is disclosure of developments of an inventive nature, the contracting officer shall request assistance from the NRC Patent Counsel, Office of the Executive Legal Director.
- 2. Security Review
- In most cases, contractor reports will be unclassified. Should a l
report of classified work be. required, however, the NRC project manager must work with the NRC Division of Security to establish the appropriate classification procedures and inform the contractor of such procedures through the contracting officer.
- p. -
l l Appro. ded: April 29,1982 10 4
s, ,
- RS-RES-84-128 Page 136 -
PUBLICATION OF UNCLASSIFIED REGULATORY AND TECHNICAL REPORTS PREPARED BY NRC CONTRAC- NRC Appendix 3202 TORS. INCLUDING REPORTS PREPARED UNDER OR Parj !! PURSUANT TO INTERAGENCY AGREEMENTS C. PROCEDURES FOR PRINTING AND DISTRIBUTING
- 1. Printing Reproducible masters prepared in accordance with this appendix shall be transmitted to the Division of Technical Information and Document Control, accompanied by completed NRC Form 426A (Exhibit 5). NRC Fonn 426A must be signed by the NRC project manager or a contractor official authorized by the project manager.
Such authorization shall be reported in writing to TIDC. The Division of Technical Infonnation and Document Control will review the masters for adherence to the stahdards set forth in this [ chapter and appendix and will arrange for printing and distributing the report. Unsatisfactory masters will be reported to the NRC project manager for appropriate contractual action by the contract-ing officer or, in the case of government ' agency or interagency agreement ' work, the publications manager of the performing organization.
- 2. - Reprinting -
Requests for reprinting. any. report subsequent .to the initial print-ing require approval of the Division of Technical Information and Document Control. Each request shall include a written justification and the project managers approval for reprinting along with a list of recipients and their complete addresses.
- 3. Distribution of Reports All copies of formal contractor reports will be distributed by th'e Division of Technical Information and Document Control in accord-ance with instructions on NRC Form 426A (Exhibit 5). The Division of ' Technical Information and Document Control will also arrange automatic distribution of these reports to the NRC Document Control System, the NRC Public Document Room, the National Technical Information Service (NTIS), the Government Printing Office and the Depository Library Service.
If any distribution is to be made other than, or in addition to, the standard distribution established for the report, written justification and the project manager's approval for printing additional copies shall accompany the reproducible masters when submitted to the Division of Technical Information and Document Control. Address labels for the additional distribution must be supplied. 11 Approved: Aprd 29, 1982
* =
. o RS-RES-84-128 Page 137 -
PUBLICATION OF' UNCLASSIFIED REGULATORY AND TECHNICAL REPORTS PREPARED BY NRC CONTRAC-TORS. INCLUDING REPORTS PREPARED UNDER OR PURSUANT TO INTERAGENCY AGREEMENTS NRC Appendix 3202 EXHIBIT 1 SAMPLE COVER FOR UNCLASSIFIED FORMAL CONTRACTOR PREPARED DOCUMENTS, EXCLUDING THOSE PREPARED UNDER OR PURSUANT TO INTERAGENCY AGREEMENTS NRC Report No. NUREG/CR 1676 Contractor Report No. (if any) NUSAC 556 - Vol.1 - Vol., Part, Rev., etc. (if any) Ti . Using Advanced Process Monitoring to improve Material Control Subtitle and Type of Report Final Report (Annual, Topical, etc.) September 1979 - September 1980 l l P, .e e, a L w a
.a. m L trca,a a tume Author (s) l ,
Contractor NusAc tace,pe,.i.e
""U I/E*EUU,a.,w...,,
I Co,nmession l I 13 Approved : April 29. 1980
RS-RES-84-128
. Page 138 ~
PUBLICATION OF UNCLASSIFIED REGULATORY AND TECHNICAL REPORTS PREPARED BY NRC CONTRAC-NRC Appendix 3202 TORS, INCLUDING REPORTS PREPARED, UNDER OR
. Exhibit PURSUANT TO INTERAGENCY AGREEMENTS, EXHIBIT 2 4
. SAMPLE TITLE PAGE FOR UNCLASSIFIED FORMAL CONTRACTOR.
PREPARED DOCUMENTS, EXCLUDING THOSE PREPARED UNDER OR PURSUANT TO INTERAGENCY AGREEMENTS NRC REPORT No. NUREGICR-1676 Contractor Report No. (if any) ySAC 566 Vol., Part, Rev., etc. (if any) Distribution Category No. (if any) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ - - -- Titie Using Advanced Process Monitoring to improve Material Control Subtitle and Type of Report Final Report (Annual, Topical, etc.) Septemaer 1979 September 1980 Report Dates and Bases s 7 som Author (s), Editor (s), yg , , , Compaler(s), etc. , _ Contractor Name mgua ia. .=s and Address eac6 a va ariar
""C 5'*"'* ""i" 0 : = " .',*u' ..e e.
8'M*' ?q'f.0*/a "'.:':,*3 "'"" NRC Contract No. N b Ne$ l i , . ,
. Approved: April 29,1982 14
. +
e RS-RES-84-128 Page 139 - 1 PUBLICATION OF UNCLASSIFIED REGULATORY AND ~ TECHNICAL REPORTS PREPARED BY NRC CONTRAC-TORS, INCLUDING REPORTS PREPARED UNDER OR NRC Appendix 3202 PURSUANT TO INTER AGENCY, AGREEMENTS Exhibit EXHIBIT 3 SAMPLE COVER FOR UNCLASSIFIED FORMAL REPORTS PREPARED UNDER OR PURSUANT TO INTERAGENCY AGREEMENTS 1 NRC Report No. NUREG/CR 1952 - Contractor Report No. SAND 81-0151
- vol., Part. Rev., etc.
LOCA-Simulation Thermal-Shock - Test of Sliding-Link Terminal Blocks Type of Report Independent Verification Testing Program or subtitle Independent Verification Test-1 Tw . inn e.,sNL
*'" %',YZ,"i ss M'iN5c .JAt 7
Author (s), Editor (s) Centracto' s.w. m. w w .. Sponsorship , , ,,,,,,,,,, 15 Approved: April 29,1982
RS-RES-84-128 Page 140 PUBLICATION OF UNCLASSIFIED REGULATORY AND TECHNICAL REPORTS PREPARED BY NRC CONTRAC-NRC Appendix 3202 TORS. INCLUDING REPORTS PREPARED UNDER OR Exhibit PURSUANT TO INTERAGENCY AGREEMENTS , EXHIBIT 4 SAMPLE TITLE PAGE FOR UNCLASSIFIED FORMAL REPORTS PREPARED UNDER OR PURSUANT TO INTERAGENCY AGREEMENTS NRC Report No. Contractor's Report No. Nunf GiCR 1952 Vol., Part Rev., etc. 5 ANO81-0151 Distribution Category
~
na LOCA-Simulation Thermal-Shock Test of Sliding-Link Terminal Blocks Subtrtie enospensent verdicaten Tm no Frogiam enoopenoont Versfecaten Test 1 Report Detes ,imi Author (s) Editor (s) g , ,, u ,,,,, , . , . , . i t w c <sas w a n.sme.eese a e e ,seaC s wu Contreetoc's **'**'""* Narne and Address "ac Saa'"*'** s':" f .'5 .. ..e . .. . ... 8'!'*f.*'.M'".f.".' !"':,*.=' NRC FIN No. OncNEie (I i I l i
~
1 l l l i l l . Approved: April 29,1982 16
' 9 e
# 9
+ . ,
- RS-RES-84-128 Page 141 _
PUBLICATION LW UNCI.ASSIFIED REGULATORY AND TECHNICAL REPORTS PREPARED BY NRC CONTRAC-TORS, INCLU11If1G REPORTS PREPARED UNDER OR NRC Appendix 3202 PURSU AEP, TO, INTER AGEN_C_Y_ AGREEMENTS _ Exhibit EXHIBIT 5 NRC FORM 426A, PUBLICATIONS RELEASE FOR UNCLASSIFIED NRC CONTRACTOR AND CONSULTANT REPORTS
.. u..
- p. .
rusucArious netrast 7oR UNCLASSarIED . ...... ............
~~ 7,,;a. g,*,,-
anc cominacion, ,ano .. con r 5,ul..TANT . REPonTS -. ,
................. g...........-.---- p...~.-.-.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p i . . .-.- ..
.................u..................u......
I I i........... i..........
.. --..+....... . . ,
l i 1 l
........n.....,,,. ... n....
* * * ~
. .......... **-'a'**'-"'""*-'*"'"*""'"'"'-'"
f . [
.......n............ . ,,.. .. ... .-... ... .
( .......................
.......n...........
........ ..........,.. . . . . . . . . . - . - . . - - t....
I Approved: April 29. 1982 17
RS-RES-84-128 Page 142 , PUBLICATION OF UNCLASSIFIED REGULATORY AND TECHNICAL REPORTS PREPARED BY NRC CONTRAC-NRC Appendix 3202 TORS. INCLUDING REPORTS PREPARED UNDER OR Exhibit PURSUANT TO INTERAGENCY AGREEMENTS EXHIBIT 6 DISCLAIMER AND AVAILABILITY STATEMENTS (BACK OF COVER) , NOTICE This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an egency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Govemment nor any agency thereof, or any of their employees, makes any warranty, empressed or imphed, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for any third party's use, or the results of such use, of any information, apparatus, product or process disclosed in this report, or represents that its use by such third party would not infringe ' privately owned rights. , OPTIONAL The views expressed in this report are not necessarily those of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comminion. 7 Available from GPO Sales Program Division of Technical Information and Document Control U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 l^ and National Technical information Service Springfield, Virginia 22161 Approved: April 29.1982 18
. , o., RS-RES-84-128 - Page 143 PUBLICATION OF UNCLASSIFIED REGULATORY AND . TECHNICAL REPORTS PREPARED BY NRC CONTRAC-TORS JNCLUDING REPORTS PREPARED UNDER OR NRC Appendix 3202 PURSUAN_T TO INTER AGENCY AGREEMENTS ._ Exhib_st EXHIBIT 7 NRC FORM 335 - BIBLIOGRAPHIC DATA SHEET sp 773 U L NUCLlam 200UL ATOmv COblabaWitBO BISLIOGRAPHic DATA SHEET e TITLE AN0 5ueTaTLE pee Fahmus No d esagneed 2 ft.e esme) 3 atCirtENT's ACCEsasC*e No f auf sson W3 6 Daft atPCat CoutttfED woes tee l vs.m o Ptos cauiNG OncAN62Af tope News ANO waspNC acontSS #aea.m te Cos'd Dart atPonteSSut0 wonta jvaan
. ,t..... :
. .t . ..e ,
17 SPON50meNG CmGA8*staf sons seaut aNo wasting a008858 paewe to Ceess 80 **0JECf tf aSEiwoma wNe t No 11 CominaCf 8eo 13 7 vet 07 atront og m co C ow I et 0 88ae=e 8.**f Il SUPettutNf amv Notts 14 st..se mees 16 AestmaCT 000-sessermess 17 4 t v wC4 05 ANO DOCUwt Nt amasv5 5 97. OtSCA'*fom$ t 7e not Niss et as,org N t NM o tE ews
.. .va.tae.uf v sf att ut NT . sa Cua.Tv Ct.ss ,f .e ..e-, := No o e.a s
, ,E C om. t . C , . o ,,... . . n . ..C. .
N .c . 0.. n. . . t 1. 19 Approved: April 29, 1982 ,
.. s;. RS-RES-84-128 Page 144 PUBLI' CATION OF l'NCLASSIFIED REGULATORY AND ~ TECHNICAL REPORTS PREPARED BY NRC CONTRAC-TORS, INCLUDING' REPORTS PREPARED UNDitR OR PURSUANT TO INTERAGENCY AGREEMENTS NRC Mpendix 3202 PART !!! TECHNICAL LETTER REPORTS A. FORMAT
- 1. Applicability
- a. The requirements of this part apply to contractor technical letter reports.
- b. With respect to classified reports and reports "For Official Use Only ," these requirements shall be used in conjunction with Chapter NRC-2101. .
- c. The requirements of this part do not apply to consultants and contractors to the NRC boards, panels, and advisory committees which report directly to the Commission.
- 2. Requirements Technical letter reports are prepared, duplicated and distributed in accordance with the requirements of the Statement of Work in the contract or in the Standard Order for DOE Work. Each such report must be identified with the financial number (FIN) and contract number assigned to the project. The NRC project manager is res-ponsible for making such reports available in the NRC Public Docu-ment Room (PDR) by sending them to the PDR through the NRC Document Control System.
B. PATENT AND SECURITY REVIEW
- 1. Patent Review Patent implications shall be considered prior to approval of reports for public release so that disclosure will not adversely affect the patent rights of NRC. If the work being reported is contractually managed through another government agency (e.g., DOE labora-tories), that government agency should be requested by the con-tractor to perform the patent review.
If NRC directly administers the contract or the contractor is unable to obtain a patent clearance from the government agency administer-ing the contract, the responsible NRC contracting officer shall be consulted , and the responsible NRC project manager shall consider the patent imphcation. If there is a possibility that there is disclosure of developments of an inventive nature , the NRC contracting officer shall request assistance from the NRC Patent Counsel, Office of the Executive Legal Director. 21 Approved: Aprd 29. 1982
RS-RES-84-128 Page 145 PUBLICATION OF UNCLASSIFIED REGULATORY AND TECHNICAL REPORTS PREPARED BY NRC CONTRAC-NRC Appendix 3202 TORS, INCLUDING REPORTS PREPARED UNDER OR Part III PURSUANT TO INTERAGENCY AGREEMENTS
- 2. Security Review In most cases, contractor reports will be unclassified. Should a report of classified work be required, however, the project manager must work with the Division of Security to establish the appropriate classification procedures and inform the contractor of such procedures.
l o l l .
~ 'Appr'oved : April 29,1982 22 ,
e a : -- . . . . - , - - . .
- i. .
. .. RS-RES-84-128 e
Page 146 l , PUBLICATION OF UNCLASSIFIED REGULATORY AND TECHNICAL REPORTS PREPARED BY NRC CONTRAC-TORS, INCLUDING REPORTS PREPARED UNDER OR . NRC Appendix 3202 PURSUANT TO INTERAGENCY AGREEMENTS PART IV , FORMAL REPORTS TO BE PRINTED FOR THE NRC OFFICE OF ! NUCLEAR REGULATORY RESEARCH BY DOE LABORATORIES WITH JCP-AUTHORIZED FEDERAL PRINTING PLANTS A. DOCUMENTATION
- 1. Applicability
- a. The requirements of this part apply to NRC staff who are responsible for agreements with DOE Laboratories and their contractors who print regulatory and technical reports required by agreement with NRC.
- b. With respect to classified reports and reports "For Official Use ~
Only," the requirements set forth in this part shall be used in conjunction with Chapter NRC-2101. + c. The requirements of this part do not apply to consultants and contractors to the NRC boards and advisory committees which report directly to the Commission.
- 2. Front Cover and Title Page
- a. Separate covers (of different paper than that of the text) and title page are required.*
- b. Items such as those shown in Exhibits 3 and 4 and discussed below shall appear on the front cover and title page, as appro-priate.** While layouts and typefaces need not be exactly the same as in Exhibits 3 and 4, the items shall appear in approxi-mately the locations indicated and with the same relative prominence.
(1) NRC Report Number. Each report shall be identified by an NRC , controlled alphanumeric number as the prime number unique to that document. The centralized document control system for unique identification is maintained by the Divi-sion of Technical Information and Document Control. Numbers may be.obtained by calling the Division of Tech-nical Information and Document Control or by submitting a copy of NRC Form 426A (Exhibit 5) with a request for a number. e The cover stock of the performing organization may be used; however it must include the data elements shown in Exhibit 3.
"The'se requirements meet the specifications of American National Standard ANSI . Z39.18-1974, " Guidelines for Format and Production of Scientific and -
Technical Reports ," and ANSI Z39.23-1974, " Technical Report Numbers . " 23 Approved: April 29,1982 -
RS-RES-84-128 Page 147 PUBLICATION OF UNCLASSIFIED REGULATORY AND TECHNICAL REPORTS PREPARED BY NRC CONTRAC-NRC Appendix-3202 TORS, INCLUDING REPORTS PREPARED UNDER OR Part IV PURSUANT TO INTERAGENCY AGREEMENTS The NRC identification number will have the form: NUREG/CR-1234 The contractor's report number, if any, will be inserted below the NUREG number on the title page and cover, as shown in Exhibits 3 and 4, if desired by the contractor. When a report consists of more than one volume or bind-ing or is issued in more than one edition, an appropriate volume , supplement, part, or revision designation shall appear immediately below the report number (s) . NRC report numbers on covers' and title pages shall be shown entirely on one line to facilitate computer processing. (2) Title and Subtitle (a) Use a brief title, which indicates clearly the subject matter covered in the report. (b) When a report is prepared in more than one volume, repeat the primary title on each volume. (c) If appropriate, show the type of report (e.g. , annual report, final report, etc.) and the period covered as part of the subtitle. (3) Personal Author (s)' Name(s) , (a) Authors' names should be given on the title page and cover unless this is impractical, as in the case of annual reports which have many contributors . If authors' contributions are as editors, compilers, etc. , so indicate on title page and cover following the names. In addition, list affiliation of each author only if affiliated with an organization other than the organization generating the report. (b) Authors may be identified on backstrips (spines) of bound volumes. (4) Organization Identification (a) On the cover, provide the name of the contractor responsible for preparing the report, followed by i
" Prepared for the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission . "
(b) On the title page, provide information of the type illustrated in Exhibit 4.
,Appqoved : April 29, 1982 24
.A -e. .
RS-RES-84-128 Page 148 - PUBLICATION OF UNCLASS!FIED REGULATORY AND TECHNICAL REPORTS PREPARED BY NRC CONTRAC- , TORS, INCLUDING REPORTS PREPARED UNDER OR NRC Appendix 3202 PURSUANT TO INTER AGENCY AGREEMENTS Psrt IV (5) Basis fo,r, Report Dates ,d (a) The basis for dating may be shown along with the date on the title page. Various bases for dating are possible; e.g. , date report completed, date reviews completed, date published, date distributed , etc. (b) More than one date, with the basis for each, may be shown where this is necessary.
- 3. ' Availability and Price Information
. All formal reports will be made available for sale by NRC and NTIS.
The following statement is required on the inside of'the front cover (Exhibit 6): . Available from NRC/GPO Sales Program Division of Technical Information and Document Control U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
- Washington, D.C. 20555 Available from National Technical Information Service (NTIS)
Springfield, Virginia 22161
- 4. Disclaimer The following notice shall be added during the printing step on the -
inside front cover (Exhibit 6): "This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, or any of
- , their employees , makes . any warranty, expressed or implied , or
! assumes any legal liability or responsibility for any third party's use, or -the results of such use, of any information, appara tus , product or process disclosed, or represents that its use by such third party would not infringe privately owned rights." The follow-ing additional statement, "The views expressed in this report are not necessarily those of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission" will be printed below the standard disclaimer, if appropriate.~ Other l qualifying statements may be added, if needed (see Part I . C .. Requirements for Draft Reports).
- 5. Previous Documents in Series If the document being prepared is one in an ongoing series. list all previous documents in the series . Include document numbers and issuance dates. Place this list on the back of the title page:
1 25 App roved . April 29,1982 -
RS-RES-84-128 PUBLICATION OF' UNCLASS1FIED REGULATOb'Al TECHNICAL REPORTS PREPARED BY NRC CONTRAC-NRC Appendix 3202 TORS, INCLUDING REPORTS PREPARED UNDER OR Part IV PURSUANT TO INTERAGENCY AGREEMENTS
- 6. Abstract An abstract of 200 words or less shall be prepared for each formal report. Within the report, the abstract shall appear on a separate page between the list of previous documents in the series and the contents page.*
- 7. References and Bibliographies Do not use as reference or bibliographic material any document, personal communication, letter, memorandum or other material that is not publicly available in written form in the NRC or other govern-ment Public Document Room, in a public library or available from the i
author. State such availability for each entry or collectively for all entries . See NRC " Technical Writing Style Guide" for additional information and examples.
- 8. Bibliographic Data Sheet NRC Form 335 (Exhibit 7) shall be prepared and included in the report as the final right-hand page.
B. PATENT AND SECURITY REVIEWS
- 1. Patent Review Patent implications shall be considered prior to approval of reports for public release so that disclosure will not adversely affect the l
patent rights of NRC or the contractor. The DOE Operations Office responsible for the contractor should perform the patent review. The results of such review shall be reported by the contractor on NRC Form 426A in item 11 (Exhibit 5). l ~~
- 2. Security Review In most cases, reports will be unclassified. Should a report of classi-fied work be required, however, the NRC project manager must work with the Division of Security to establish the appropriate classifica-tion procedures and inform the contractor.
C. PROCEDURES FOR PRINTING AND DISTRIBUTING l 'l . Printing Contractor reports may be printed only by a JCP-authorized print-ing plant and then only if prepared for the NRC Office of Nuclear [- Regulatory Research. Reports printed by the contractor and one This preferred positioning of the abstract in the document need not be followed if the style manual of the originating organization requires a differ-L, ent location. Approved: April 29,1982 26 l .- . . s l
; ~ _.
. '. .. RS-RES-84-128 Page 150 PUBLICATION OF' UNCLASSIFIED REGULATORY AND -
TECHNICAL REPORTS PREPARED BY NRC CONTRAC-
- TORS, INCLUDING REPORTS PREPARED UNDER OR NRC Appendix 3202 PURSUANT TO INTERAGENCY AGREEMENTS Part IV reproducible master shall be submitted to the Division of Technical Information sad Document Control, with ecmpleted NRC Form 426A The number of copies specified by the Statement of Work for stand-ard and i .cidental distribution shall be provided. The appropriate identifying number (NUREG/CR _) may be obtained as discussed in Section A.2.b.(1). .
- 2. Reprinting Requests for reprinting of any report at NRC expense subsequent
, to the initial printing requires approval of the Division of Technical Infonnation and Document Control. The request shall include a written justification and the project managers approval for the reprint-in g , along with a list of recipients and their complete addresses. :
i.
- 3. Distribution of Reports l
All copies of formal contractor reports will be distributed by the Division of Technical Information and Document Control in accord-ance with instructions on NRC Form 426A (Exhibit 5). NRC Form 426A must be signed by a contractor official authorized by the project manager. Such authorization shall be reported in writing to the Division of Technical Information and Document Control. If any distribution is to be made other than, or in addition to, the standard distribution established for the report, written justification and the project manager's approval for printing additional copies shall accompany the reproducible masters when submitted to the Divt-sion of Technical Information and Document Control. Address labels i for the' additional distribution m'ust be supplied. l The Division of Technical Information and Document Control will l arrange automatic distribution of these reports to the NRC Docu-ment Control System, the NRC Public Document Room, the National Technical Information Service (NTIS ), the Government Printing Office and the Depository Library Service. 1 27 Approved: Aprd 29. 1982
. . - . . . . _ _ = .. _ _. _ .
.y~,
RS-RES-84-128
'- Page 151 ATTACHMENT 5 STAN0A'RD FORM 1411 WITH INSTRUCTIONS
-1. SF.1411 provides a vehicle for the offeror to submit to the Government a pricing proposal of estimated and/or incurred costs by contract line item with supporting information, adequately i
cross-referenced, suitable for detailed analysis. A cost-element breakdown, using the applicable format prescribed in 7A, B, or C below, shall be attached for each proposed line item and must reflect any specific requirements established by the Contracting Officer. Supporting breakdowns must be furnished for each cost element, consistent with offeror's cost accounting system. When more than one contract line item is proposed, sumary total amounts covering all line items must be furnished for each cost
- element. If agreement has been reached with Government
. representatives on use of forward pricing rates / factors, identify
.the agreement, include a copy, and describe its nature. Depending on offeror's system, breakdowns shall be provided for the following basic elements of cost, as applicable:
Materials - Provide a consolidated priced summary of individual material quantities included in the various tasks, orders, or contract line items being proposed and the basis for pricing (vendor quotes, invoice prices, etc.). Subcontracted Items - Include parts, components, assemblies, and
--services that are to be produced or performed by others in accordance with offeror's design, specifications, or direction and
- that are applicable only to the prime contract. For each subcont'act over $500,000, the support should provide a listing by source, item quantity, price, type of subcontract, degree of competition, and basis for establishing source and reasonableness of price, as well as the results of review and evaluation of subcontract proposals when required by FAR 15.806.
Standard Commercial Items - Consists of items that offeror normally fabricates, in whole or in part, and that are generally stocked in
- inventory. Provide an appropriate explanation of the basis for pricing. If price is based on cost, provide a cost breakdown; if priced at other than cost, provide justification for exemption from
- submission of cost or pricing data, as required by FAR 15.804-3(e).
4 Interorganizational Transfer (at other than cost) - Explain pricing
. method used. (See FAR 31.205-26).
Raw Material - Consists of material in a form or state that requires further processing. Provide priced quantities of items required for the proposal. Purchased Parts - Includes material items not covered above. Provide priced quantities of items required for the proposal.
RS-RES-84-128 Page 152 Interorganizational Transfer (at cost) - Include separate breakdown of cost by element. Direct Labor - Provide a time-phased (e.g., monthly, quarterly,
- etc.) breakdown of labor hours, rates, and cost by appropriate category, and furnish bases for estimates.
Indirect Costs - Indicate how offeror has computed and applied offeror's indirect costs, including cost breakdowns, and showing trends and budgetary data, to provide a basis for evaluating the reasonableness of proposed rates. Indicate the rates ' sed u and provide an appropriate explanation. Other Costs - List all other costs not otherwise included in the categories described above (e.g., special tooling, travel, computer and consultant services, preservation, packaging and packing, spoilage and rework, and Federal excise tax on finished articles) and provide bases for pricing. Royalties - If more than $250, provide the following information on separate page for each separate royalty or license fee: name and address of licensor; date of license agreement; patent numbers, patent application serial numbers, or other basis on which the royalty is payable; brief description (including any part or model numbers of each contract item or component 'on which tne royalty 1s payable); percentage or dollar rate of royalty per unit; unit price of contract item; number of units; and total dollar amount of royalties. In addition, if specifically requested by the Contracting Officer, provide a copy of the current license agreement and identification of applicable claims of specific patents. (See FAR 27.204 and 31.205-37). Facilities Capital Cost of Money - When the offeror elects to claim facilities capital cost of money as an allowable cost, the offeror must submit Form CASB-CMF and show the calculation of the proposed amount (see FAR 31.205-10).
- 2. As part of the specific information required, the offeror must submit with offeror's proposal, and clearly identify as such, cost j or pricing data (that is, data that are verifiable and factual and i
otherwise as defined at FAR 15.801). In addition, submit with I offeror's proposal any information reasonably required to explain i offeror's estimating process, including; L a. The judgmental factors applied and the mathematical or other methods used in the estimate, including those used in projecting from known data; and l b. The nature and amount of any contingencies included in the ! proposed price.
- 3. There is a clear distinction between submitting cost or pricing i data and merely making available books, records, and other documents without identification. The requirement for submission 9 se .- 1
~
m - _s ~. o - MS-Mth-54-145 t Page 153
,d of cost or pricing data is met when all accurate cost or pricing
_, .. data reasonably available to the offeror _ have been submitted, 'f'
~
either actually or by specific identification, to the Contracting , Officer or an authorized representative. As later information comes into the offeror's possession, it should be promptly submitted to the_ Contracting Officer. The requirement for f submission of cost or pricing data continues to the time of final agreenent on price. h [f'e" 4. '
~~- f In submitting offerorf s proposal, offeror must include an index,
' appropriately referericed, of all the cost or pricing data and information accompanying or identified in _the proposal. In
^'
, addition, any future additions and/or revisions, up to the date of A agreement on price, must be annotated on a supplemental index.
~5. - By: submitting offeror's proposal, the ' offeror, if selected for negotiation, grants, the Contracting Officer or an authorized representative the right to examine those- books, records, documents, and other supporting data that will permit adequate evaluation of the proposed price. This right may be exercised at
.; ]any time before award.
- 6. ' As soon as practicable after final agreement on price, but befo're the award resulting from the-proposal, the offaror shall, under the conditions stated in FAR 15.804-4, submit a Certificate of Current
# Cost or Pricing Data.
4 _ 7. [ Headings for Submission of Line-Item S'ummaries: A. - New Contracts (including Letter contracts). i _f Proposed Contraci:( Proposed Contract
, cost Elements Estimate-Total Cost Estimate-Unit Coct Reference
. ; i
, (1) (2) (3) (4)
Under Column (2) - Enter those necessasj ana esasonable costs that in offeror's judgment will properly be incurred in efficient contract performance. When any of the costs in this column have already been incurred (e.g. , under a letter contract or unpriced order), describe them on an attached
, suppoeting schedule. When preproduction:or startup costs are significant,'or when specifically requested to do so by the Contracting Officer, provide a full identification and explanation of them.
M, , . Under Column (3) - Optional, uniess required by the Contracting or ' Officer. e :- ,j Y Under Column (4) - Identify the attachment in which the 9 information supporting the specific cost element may be found, e
RS-RES-84-128 Page 154 Attach separate pages as necessary. B. Change Orders (modifications). Cost Of Estimated Deleted Cost of All Work Cost Work Already Net Cost To Cost Of Net Cost Of Elements Deleted Performed Be Deleted Work Added Change Reference (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Under Column (1) - Enter appropriate cost elements. Under Column (2) - Include (i) current estimates of what the cos,t would have been to complete deleted work not yet performed, and (ii) the cost of deleted work already performed. Under Column (3) - Include the incurred cost of deleted work already performed, actually comput'ed if possible, or estimated in the Contractor's accounting records. Attach a detailed inventory of work, . materials, parts, components, ano hardware already purchased, manufactured, or performed and deleted by the change, indicating the cost and proposed disposition of each line item. Also, if offeror desires to retain these items or any portion of them, indicate the amount offered for them. Under Column (4) - Enter the net cost to be deleted which is the estimated cost of all deleted work less the cost of deleted work already performed. Column (2) less Column (3) = Column (4). Under Column (5) - Enter the offeror's estimate for cost of work added by the change. When nonrecurring costs are significant, or when specifically requested to do so by the Contracting Officer, provide full identification and explanation of them. Under Column (6) - Enter the net cost of change which is the cost of work added, less the net cost to be deleted. When this result is negative, place the amount in parentheses. Column (4) less Column (5) = Column (6). Under Column (7) - Identify the attachment in which the information supporting the specific cost element may be found. Attach separate pages as necessary.
~4-
- o .+ s
e 4 -; e
,(, RS-RES-84-128 Page 155 -
C. Price Revision / Redetermination Number of Number o f Redetermina-Units Units To re Contract tion Proposal Cutoff Date Completed Completed Amount Amounc Difference (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) _ Incurred Incurred Incurred Cost- Cost- Cost- Total Estimai.ad Cost Preproduc- Completed Work In Incurred Cost To Estimated Elements tion Units Process Cost Complete Total Cost Reference
~
(7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13) (14) Under Column (1) - Enter the cutoff date required by the contract, if applicable. Under Column (2) - Enter the number of units completed during the period for which experienced costs of production are being submitted. Under Column (3) - Enter the number of units remaining to be completed under the contract. Under Column (4) - Enter the cumulative contract amount. Under Column.(5) - Enter the offeror's redetermination proposal amount. Under Column (6) - Enter the difference between the contract amount and the redetermination proposal amount. k' hen this result is negative, place the amount in parenthesis. Column (4) less Column (5) = Column (6). Under Column (7) - Enter appropriate cost elements. When residual inventory exists, the final costs established under fixed-price-incentive and fixed-price-redeterminable arrangements should be net of the fair market value of such inventory. In support of subcontract costs, submit a listing of all subcontracts subject to repricing action, annotated as to their status. Under Column (8) - Enter all costs incurred under the contract before starting production and other nonrecurring costs (usually referred to as startup costs) from offferor's books and records as of the cutoff date. These include such costs as preproduction engineering, special plant rea rrangement, training program, and any identifiable nonrecurring costs such as initial rework, spoilage, pilot runs, etc. In the event the amounts are not segregated in or otherwise available from offeror's records, enter in this column of feror's best estimates. Explain the basis for each estimate and how the costs are charged on of feror's accounting records
RS-RES-84-128 Page 156 (e.g., included in production costs as direct engineering labor, charged to manufacturing overhead, etc.). Also how the costs would be allocated to the units at their various states of contract completion. , Under Columns (9) and (10) - Enter in Column (9) the production costs from offeror's books and records (exclusive of preproduction costs reported in Column (S) of the units completed as of the cutoff date. Enter in Column (10) the costs of work in process as determined from offeror's records or inventories at the cutoff date. When the amounts for work in process are not available in Contractor's records but reliable estimates for them can be made, enter the estimated amounts in Column (10) and enter in Column (9) the differences .between the total incurred costs (exclusive of preproduction costs) as of the cutoff date and these estimates. Explain the basis for the estimates, including identification of any provision for experienced or anticipated allowances, 'such as shrinkage, rework, design changes, etc. Furnsih experienced unit or lot costs (or labor hours) from inception of contract to the cutoff date, improvement curves, and any other available production cost history pertaining to the item (s) to which offeror's proposal relates. Under Column (11) - Enter total incurred costs (Total of Columns (8), (9), and (10)). Under Column (12) - Enter those necessary and reasonable costs that in Contractor's judgment will properly be incurred in completing the remaining work to be performed under the contract with respect to the item (s) to which Contractor's proposal relates. Under Column (13) - Enter total estimated cost (Total of Columns (11) and (12)). Under Column (14) - Identify the attachment in which the information supporting the specific cost element may be found. Attach separate pages as necessary.
s , . p.- southern Company services. Inc. Post Office Box 2625 J Birmingham. Alabama 352o2 ' Telephone 2o5 87o-6o11 ( Vogtie Proj.eet July 1,1982 Plant Vogtle - Units 1 and 2 LSV-NS-1022 June Monthly Progress Report Input V-A.02.01 File: X7BE02 Mr. D. O. Foster Georgia Power Company Atlanta, Georgia
Dear Mr. Foster:
The status, or action taken, concerning major licensing issues as of the . end of June follows: Millett Fault Investigation - Work has continued on this effort. Table I shows the studies identified by the task force and schedule for completion of each item. A total of 12 holes are being cored (8 on Georgia side and 4 on South Carolina side). The status of each item is given below. (a) Helicopter Reconnaissance of Area - This item is 100 percent complete ( and did not show any indication of displacement in the area of the inferred Millett or Statesboro Fault discussed in the USGS Report. (b) Boat Reconnaissance of Savannah River Bluffs - This item is 100 percent complete and did not show any indication of displacement in the general vicinity of the inferred Millett Fault. - ! (c) Geological Mapping - This item is 100 percent complete and the conclusion is that the surface geologic mapping of the area in the vicinity of the inferred Millett Fault reveals no evidence of faulting. No offsets, shear zones, etc., were noted. The rough draft of the report is complete. - (d) Core Drilling - Holes VG-1 through VG-8 on the Georgia side o'f the river are complete. VSC-1 and VSC-2 on the South Carolina side of the river are complete. VSC-3 and VSC-4, the only remaining holes left to be drilled, should be complete by July 2. This task is about 95 percent complete. Drilling in both Georgia and South Carolina strongly suggests the absence of faulting within the depth of the investigation (0-600 feet). (e) Geoph_ysical Logging of Core Holes - All the holes on Georgia side have been logged. Two out of the four holes on the South Carolina side have been logged. The two remaining holes should be completed by July 2. This task is about 85 percent complete. Correlation of the geophysical data from the core holes strongly suggests absence of faulting within the depth investigated.
)
\
. Mr. D. O. Fost;r l
*" l
. July 1, 1982 Page 2 ~
l (f) Geophysical Logging of Wells AL-66 and PSR - AL-66, an irrigation well, has been logged; PSR,- an observation well on the Savannah River property has also been logged. This task is 100 percent complete. (g) Installation of Observation Wells - All the wells on the Georgia side have been installed. Two out of the four on the South Carolina side have been installed. The remaining effort should be completed by. July
- 8. This task is about 85 percent complete.
(h) Subbottom Profiling in Savannah River - Field work, data reduction, and report preparation are essentially complete. The results show several continuous reflecting. horizons down to a depth of approximately 1000 feet crossing the inferred Millett and Statesboro Faults with no displacements. The preliminary conclusions are that the data does not indicate faulting within these zones. This data still has to be correlated with the drilled holes. (1) Water Well Measurement Program - This field work is 100 percent complete, and the office evaluation is about 50 percent complete. The data has been sent to the Bechtel office-San Francisco to be used as inputs in i the ground water modeling effort. The survey covered about 4400 square miles and about 850 wells were measured. (j) Procurement of Data From the USGS, State Agencies - This task is 100 percent complete and the data has been sent to the Bechtel office in 2 San Francisco,
- b. (k) Procurement of University Thesis '- This task is 100 percent complete.
(1) Monitoring of USGS Core Hole - The USGS suspended drilling when Artesian pressures were encountered in the hole. Drilling resumed June 10 and the effort was abandoned on June 15 when the USGS was unable to overcome the pressures. The core that was available when work was stopped has been examined by SCS Geologist. (m) Procurement of Vibroseis Data - On the advise of consultant C. Savitt, this task has been placed on hold and may not be cost effective. Unless a need is identified later this data will not be procured. (n) Ground Water Modeling - All the field data has been obtained'and this task is 40 percent complete. At this time, the projected completion date is scheduled for July 23. g (o) Surface Water Hydrology - This task is 100 percent complete. The USGS did their base flow studies using data which was not concurrent and which,therefore, had not been corrected for climatological factors. The same analysis using concurrent data yields results which do not support the presence of a fault. (p) Search of Oil Industry Data - This task is complete. There has been little useful data obtained to date. A commercially available gravity survey by Southeast exploration and production company may be reviewed and recommended for purchase if useful.
.. Mr. D. O. Foster July 1,1982 Pag 2 3 (q) Microseismicity Study - This task is 100 percent complete. The historic seismicity data does not support the presence of an active fault in this area.'
- (r) Remote Sensing - This task is 80 percent complete and the report is in e preparation. Only one lineament was discovered and it does not coincide with trace of the Suggested Millett Fault. The field checking does not reveal any evidence of faulting associated with this feature. There
< were no other. features suggestive of faulting observed. All of the satellite imagery and photography examined did not show any evidence of.
surface expression for the inferred Millett Fault. Review by consultants suggested that an independent review of the images be conducted to check other possible lineaments.
-(s) Petrography - The evaluation of the samples is about 60 percent complete.
Results of lithologic analysis including petrographic examination of thin sections, clay mineralogy, and heavy mineral analysis of samples
- from VG-1 through VG-4 and wells AL-66 and AL-40 support field studies which indicate the absence of faulting. Studies of samples from VSC-1 through 4 and VG-5 through VG-8 remains to be performed.
,. (t) Literature Search - This task is 100 percent complete. Annotated bibliography of references currently in preparation. (u) Reduction of Field Data - This task is about 80 percent complete. (v) Consultant Revisions - The consultants are reviewing the results of the
- (.. . , above tasks and in some cases are involved in the actual work. Messrs.
- LeGrand, Popadapulos, Wood, LaMoreaux, Hatcher, Henry and Stepp have visited the field and reviewed core and drilling results. It is planned to have Mr. Savit review the SRP seismic data, and Dr. Bolt review the seismicity. A meeting with the task force and the consultants-
. was held in San Francisco on June 29. A meeting with the task force and the SRP and Allied General personnel is scheduled for July 15.
t l l s l l l 1 i i i l
g O ~ E BE $*5I
' X d U-E!.
E ZE 5 I i 8 PW
=
* =g$
E;; I: l i l l l
. cl.
18 i i i 3 l 3 I I i i 5"isU" E 9 L I -l l 1 l ' E I i i l *
>?I5 I uv '
- l l 1
l1 I I I Eg argE 3 l azum
- . l I I i l I
* .N I I l ,l 3 ;; ,
I - I I i l I E. E I I 1 I l l l
- I
. I 8 I I I I I e ~ ii E? I I
I i I I I i i 1 I I I
=
* * *- I I i j H j i I l
e E l 1i aa l Ii l 1 I I I i I I I I i gg j j i - 1 I I I i - m l i If I I I I 1 1 3 55 o : : I i N I I I I i
- NW ad g !
- 8 1 i i i 3 a n E
e l
!l!!
I I I I I i i I e . I. I I I ! e i i i i I
- I t I s . I I I E
- i i I .
!*I .s s>E 5 l ? s;i e
W E . . k
.E . i M i n
r !! 5 a4s 2v,3 a , g a=a gg,.[:= ., s I I t I- : a : : . 3 gl8
- l 3 t g5 g g g gg2 g g g
- : v E! I8 9 s
- E I:
=t
- E avl [i!t EI "! n !
E .: l I Eles 5 m' !M 8E-, t [=gg355:,as i e i i "- ! iegng e: tu
-M i g g3g: E : g.e se ,8 <v! : E5[;
8 a!, g
,!]Ig
, ,g ,I ':g i e :8!!sE W! = :: as -
mE EE!EE i i!Eg ue5 i E : :- . 5 5 i
+
5
.$ E
- : I a - .
. x .
,-a--,,--. - , - _ , , - , , - , , - . - , , .,
a -.- - .,-.. n-- - - . - - , , , -
..- .2 .a-
, . , - T.,
f." (.. oy y L ..- 7 \s
\.s %.C R O L I N A ,. - .
. m., -
34*- , + *
, ,N
, d o '-
i artaura St= "*>'A r k G E O R G I A ,"w, . . , . ,
)1* ,,
, -sebWn. ~
i
- g. .
. ' ,,. C , N ,'""'l
'\,-- ' .s ..g,>,
A 1 h, I e/ N . O n- -
,. N'1*~&
to l STUDY AREA h t
. ( ,
v
-------. . . r. .a7 30*- .
t t T 0 50 10 0 15 o 200 MILES l l l l I l Figure I.-Location of study area. E i L
!l l1
- 7 I i 7
I i 9
- I i . . 1 b.
.- . d. .
- m -
.A
.I " " . i s
"* s. I s
n a bR* m s .
- e.
- e.
a - ,,, t g y m m na I s. r c e
. 6i' 6l as.I
- w. .
i i i
.e i - - '-"
h e r 8
- t 6
- i i o
- i i
. d i i n
g a t a t.e e
. n. e e
A a
,. A.
l e nf g i
- m. z
- A s o s s l I H l it s# a . n p4 J I m u
- t. e.s s*
E g J i l p, e. . I l;
" o e hi.I..
e E l r w L . l I f r . I e B d f i h k
. l I e u T a a
l
. I m
i f q m m.
. i t
a . ie s l . e .. I m d B . .
. e. r l
usm . . I o
- b. . s . .
- c. . .a d . .t I 9 ,I M
n a m .d.. n. s
- m. mI.
am n ii s
.m ,
. I I
s . sc I n
, p e e I i I u.
c s m e I 1 ig i ~ : o : lo i h e. . . i
.. /,
eb s. s . l: '. ss. a= . .
- c-t i a . . n
.e.
m-i
- s. .. e. =
l c tmec Is C .o. n e. m s. ts i
.c. m.
s aas 8
=
. s.
sm a W_ y'
' e.
i i i m '- '=.
=i.
!. i i s Cs C ~
h a p i i
" t 7
~
r g il o i i s r i t e . my.
. -: f .
s . . a i f...
- m. ss f Iu dCd.
- a. g
.a,
.
- I n, es no i
i
,. C.
=,
;. / ".
I" o ca. t I n i a
'= I i
o i i 3 7 t a I I l e i I r i *. I ._ r .. . . o y .. . I
.=* 5 I . t s_,. -
f.. c. a -- s. w d._- _
~-
c s a . e I
.a ;I . . -
d e o
. s e.
n
. f
. I m.
v8 ~ I s e. e_ t g a _ .e k i
. as -
a.s N i
=
I am I iz I I n-l a I I - r 1 e n e G . , , n
^ .
- m. ,
io Wg i I n e ha - s., ,, t h s I , w e " = e . a l b ler r a o T c e g n
. a
- m
. . . ., a.e .
g h C "a e e S a. s e a
- a. - T n
a 4 s s c
. i
_ t e v 4 it t a n e T Qg** y5u6 yb YUy. g2s sL / t_
a b' w [-j G P% u- _ l\uclear In"ormation anc Resource Service 1346 Connecticut Avenue NW,4th Floor. Washington, D C. 20036 (202) 296-7552 May 23, 1984 James M. Felton, Director Division of Rules and Records PREEDOM OF INFORMATION Office of Adminstration ACT REQUEST U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555
,g g FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT REQUEST AA h
Dear Mr. Felton:
Pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 522, as amended, the Nuclear Information and Resource Service re-quests the following documents regarding the Charleston Earthquake of 1886 and seismic design for the Vogtle nuclear power plant. Please consider." documents" to include reports, studies, test results, correspondence, memoranda, meeting notes, meeting minutes, working papers, graphs, charts, diagrams, notes and summaries of conversations and interviews, computer records, and any other forms of written communication, including internal NRC Staff memoranda. The documents are specifically requested from, but not limited to, the Office of the Executive Legal Director (OELD); Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research (Research); Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR); Generic Issues Branch of the Division of Safety Technology, NRR; and the Operating Reactors Branches of the Division of Licensing. In your
- response, please identify which documents correspond to which requests below.
Pursuant to this request, please provide all documents pre-pared or utilized by, in the possession of, or routed through the NRC related to: , 4
- 1. The Millett earthquake fault postulated to exist 7 miles .
from the Vogtle reactor site (USGS Open File Report No. I 82-156); I
- 2. The implications for the siting and seismic design of the 1 Vogtle nuclear plant of the 1886 Charleston earthquake; l l
- 3. The development (and any subsequent reanalysis) of a Safe Shutdown Earthquake (SSE) and an Operating Basis Earthquake l
! (OBE) for the Vogtle nuclear plant; 4 Contract No. RS-RES-84-128 " Charleston Earthquake
~ ,od,,LM ;Lf5 1
'..~ ~
Research Program";
- 5. All correspondence between USGS and the NRC regarding the Charleston earthquake, the Millett fault or the Vogtle nuclear plant; and
- 6. All NRC Staff memoranda or correspondence related to the seismic design and/or siting of the Vogtle nuclear plant.
In our opinion, it is appropriate in this case for you to waive copying and search charges, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552(a)(4)(A) "because furnishing the information can be considered as primarily benefiting the general public." The , Nuclear Information and Resource Service is a non-profit organization serving local organizations concerned about nuclear power and providing information to the general public. Sincerely, D Nina Bell Nuclear Safety Analyst cc: File
(
~}
. /, %
S% - 9,. . .
% Cys \
f ?.d j /". *,, g UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION l I
)
, waswiscrow, o. c. 2 osse r, f 1
s April 30, 19.84 l
%,*****/< _
% r
. j Docket Nos.: 50-424 '
and 50-425 Mr. Donald O. Foster Vice President and General Manager Georgia Power Company P. O. Box 299A, Route 2 l Way'nisboro,GA 30830 e
Dear Mr. Foster:
l l
SUBJECT:
REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON V0GTLE, UNITS 1 AND 2 l Enclosed are of staff's review requests the Vogtle for additional Final Safety information Analysis resulting(from Report FSAR).the While these questions represent the bulk of the staff's review, some addi-tional questions will be forwarded as soon as they are available. The instrumentation and control systems questions numbered 420.7 through 420.56 are for discussion at a meeting presently scheduled for August 27-30 at the Bechtel offices in Los Angeles. At the meeting, your staff should be prepared to use detailed instrument, control and fluid system schematic drawings to explain system deigns and to provide verification that design bases and regulatory criteria are met. At this time written responses are not required for these questions. However, some written responses may be required following the August meeting. In addition to the questions in the structural area, you should be aware that design reports must be provided to the staff for a future structural design audit covering SRP Sections 3.8.3, 3.8.4, and 3.8.5. A suggested format is included in Appendix C to SRP Section 3.8.4, but as long as sub-stantial structura1 design information is included in its content, some-l deviation from that format will be acceptable. The structural design audit is tentatively scheduled for September 1984. l The staff would like to meet with your staff on several other issues, ! specifically in the areas of geosciences and quality assurance. The meeting
- to discuss the quality assurance questions should be held at Vogtle and include a tour of the plant site. The Vogtle Pro,fect Manager, Melanie Miller, will be in contact with your staff regarding scheduling of these meetings.
l . 1 l i W - - . - - - ~ ~ ~ Aff u .*~" ~~ * ". m; ;.: x w .:.. ; . ..=;. .;:.e- - -- ...;; _;f,7,:, .,,=-- ,, _ _ __
YFi? " , In addition to responding to staff questions in the area of operating and maintenance procedures, Georgia Power is to submit a Procedures Generation Package (PGP) in accordance with Supplement I to NUREG-0737, " Requirements The staff for Emergency Response Capability" (Generic Letter No. 82-33). will conduct its review of the PGP prior to the beginning of formal oper-ator training on the Vogtle emergency operating procedures. If there are any questions, contact Ms. Miller at (301) 492-4259. .- The reporting and/or recordkeeping requirements contained in this letter affect fewer than ten respondents; therefore, OMB clearance is not required under P.L. 96-511. Sincerely, 1 Elinor G. Adensam, Chief Licensing Branch No. 4 Division of Licensing
Enclosure:
As stated cc: See next page W p l e . O i .
. /
' ~'
i
. _g , - Vogtle Electric Generating Plant Seismology Questions 230.2 Update Table 2.5.2-1 and Figure 2.5.2-1 to include recent (SRP.
2.5.2.1) events contained in Bulletins of the Southeastern U.S. Seismic Network. Wherever possible note the hypocentra'l depth of the earthquakes. Evaluate seismic data acquired for the review of the nearby Savannah River Plant. 230.3 Provide supporting bases and assess the impact of Charleston (SRP 2.5.2.2) seismicity on the site in light,of the new information and data obtained from various funded investigations and the various working hypotheses that have emerged from these studies. For example, it has been suggested that Triassic _ Basins may be a possible source for generating a Charleston type earthquake (Marine,and Siple, 1974', BGSA). Provide an evaluation of this hypothesis and its impact upon ground' motion at the VEGP site, which lies in & Triassic Basin. e e
V0GTLE GE0 LOGY QUESTIONS
/ 231. Figure 2.5.1-10, a site map, shows an area in a rectangle enclosure with a note referring the reader to Figure 2.5.1-G for more detail of the area. The figure actually being referred to appears to be Figure 2.5.1-11.
Please check and I correct. -
~
231.2 The discussion of the tectonic model for the development of the Southern Appalachians used the model described by Hatcher in 1972. In the twelve years since that time more l geophysical and geologic information has resulted in the development of much newer concepts. The simple subduction model has given way to decollements, exotic terranes, suspect terranes, etc. Please update the section on the tectonic development of.the Southern Appalachians. (NUREG-0800, Section 2.5.1, p. 2.5.1-4, 6 and Section 2.5.3.5). Some recent references are suggested, but your update should not be limited to them. - 1 l Selected References l l Cook, F. A. and Oliver,1981, The late Precambrian-early l Paleozoic continental edge in the Appalachian origin: Amer. 1 Jour. Sci. v. 281, p. 993-1008. Williams, H. and Hatcher, R.D. , Jr. ,1982, Suspect terranes and accretionary history of the Appalachian origin Geology,
- v. 10, p. 530-536.
9 O
.* .O 8 a ese
/ - 231.3-1 Section 2.5.1.1.3.3.1.4 (p. 2'.5.1-11, 12), which describes
. the Hawthorn Formation and its characteristic occurrences of clastic dikes is very much out of date. Since Siple's 1967
. paper, several investigations and papers have dealt with details of the clastic dikes. The more recent information should be obtained, reviewed, and used in responding to the remaining questions on the dikes, which follow. A suggested reference list will be found at the end of this set of questions. The staff further suggests the following course of action in obtaining the information: -
(a) In obtaining a copy of Secor's 1979 report to Allied Chemical on the Chem-Nuclear waste disposal site at Barnwell, the applicant should request the original photographs or copies, as the reproduction process used for the report was unsuccessful in providing useable copies.of the photos. The report depends heavily upon the photos in the descriptions of relationships. - (b) The applicant should contact P. Talwani of the University of South Carolina about.recent discoveries of seismically induced sand blows associated with the Charleston earthquake, for comparison with the dikes in the siteregion,andthosedescribedbyHeron(1971).' (NUREG-0800,Section2.5.1,I). I l
, :. , ; / -- - -
[. j)I ? . Considering the information in the referenced papers, 231.3-2
~
~'
including (1) the absence of solution ca'vities at Barnwell (FinalEnvironmentalStatement,1976),(2)three cross-c'utting sets of dikes with preferred orientations (Secor, 1979), (3) the apparent similarity between Talwani's seismicsand-blowfeatureandaclasticdikeinBarnweil County drawn by Heron (1971), and (4) reports of seismic liquefaction phenomena up to 100 mi from Charleston during
. the 1886 earthquake in or near Barnwell County (Seeber and Armbruster, 1981,1983) evaluate the impact of these .
findings on your interpretation that the dikes resulted from a combination of dessication-and-infilling and collapse into solution basins, and not the result of seismic ground shaking. (NUREG-0800, Section 2.5.1, I). 231.3-3 a. What is the relative proportions of sand, silt and clay in the three sets of dikes? .
- b. What are the ages of the dikes? Cin the ages be bracketed or absolute ages be determined by any presently used methods?
(NUREG-0800, Section 2.5.1, I).
- c. Based on the egipting literature, how far southwest and northeast of Vogtle along the Coastal Plain are the dikes known to occur, i.e. do they continue northward of North Carolina into Virginia and beyond, and southward through Georgia and alabama. Are there known limits to their distribution?
/
.g.
/
/. Suggested References
/ , i Al.1,ied-General Nuclear Services,1980, Geological Investigation at the Chem-Nuclear Waste Storage Site, Barnwell, South Carolina-February 24, , 1980, Summary report by Dr. Paul G. Mayer; Report by Dr. Donald T.' Secor, Jr.; Related Correspondence.. Cox, J., and Talwani, P.,1984, Discovery of a paleoliquefaction site near Charleston, South Carolina, Geol. Soc. America Southeastern and North Central Sections Annual Meeting, Abstracts with Programs, p. 130. Heron, S.D. , Judd, J.B. and Johnston,-H.S. , Jr. ,1971; Clastic dikes associated with soil horizons in the North and South Carolina Coastal Plain; Geol . Soc. America Bull . , v. 82, p.1801-1810. Inden, R.F. and Zupan, A.J., W. ,1975, Nonnal faulting of Upper Coastal Plain sediments, Ideal Kaolin Mine, Langley, South Carolina, Geologic Notes, So. Carolina State Development Board Division of Geology, v.19,
- p. 159-165.
Seeber, L. and Armbruster, J.G.,1981, The 1886 Charleston, South Carolina Earthquake and the Appalachian Detachment, Jour. Geoph. Res.,
- v. 86, p. 7874-7894 .
0 9
- ~ - - - - - - . - - - . . - - - ,
' ~
Seeber, L. and Armbruster, J.G.,1983. Large strain effects of the 1886
/ South Carol'ina Earthquake U.S.G.S. Charleston Earthquake Workshop, Proceedings of Conference XX, Charleston, S.C., p. '142-149 Zupan, A-J. W. and Abbott, W.H., 1975, Clastic dikes: Evidence for post-Eocene tectonics in the upper Coastal Plain of South Carolina; Geologic Notes, So. Carolina State Development Board Division of Geology, v. 19, p. 14-23.~
231.4 Section 2.5.1.2.3.1 (P. 2.5.1 - 8) presents a brief sumary of the USGS Open File Report 82-156, in which the Millett and Statesboro Faults are postulated, and references the Bechtel Millett Fault Study in response. A sumary of the fault study and evidence for the conclusions should be incorporated into the FSAR, in accordance with SRP guidelines that call for evidence that a capable fault does not exist.within the site vicinity. (NUREG4800,Section 2.5.3,I). 231.5 - In Section 2.5.1.2.8.2, the statement is made that there is l no evidence that surficial or subsurface materials have been affected by prior earthquake activity. Discuss in detail the kinds of evidence that would indicate prior earthquake l activity. (NUREG-0800, Section 2.5.1-I).
~
6
3
- 231.6 Provide an interpretation of seismic profile A between .e
~
.. points 15 and 20. and seismic profile D between points -10 fa.- .
j .,. r!.T. 7 . and -5 on Figure 2.5.4-2 (sheets 2 and 3). (NUREG-0800, Section2.5.1-I).. . :i' l 4 ! 1
)
l l I l i t 9 ee s e 9 e 4 ( I 1 1 . . . - . . 4 l
% . . .w",, , .. . ......
l
( , MEETING
SUMMARY
SEP 2 31982
~
Document Control (50-424/425b . .. NRC PDR ,
~ '
L PDR ' TERA ~ NSIC - - LBf1 Rdg. . MRushbrook . - Project Manager anyant -- - Attorney, OELD { . OIE \ Regional Administrator, Region _n PARTICIPANTS (NRC): h . JHopkins. ' Albrahim , SBrocoum RJackson
- DChery
-- RMcMullen '
JGrant -
. e 6
- s e
b e S
# Se o
99
-,M _d--
- im<
4 4s,-4----A - 4 ---i- ----.----,h- _ Aa Ja - a.- -+2ad---ao--- .rrhs'_Aa _a-Ai-
; u r.,9 kg UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[
;; ;j WASHINGTON, D. C. 20S55
%,,,,./ SEP 2 31982
- Docket Nos.: 50-424 and 50-425 ,
I APPLICANT: GEORGIA POWER COW ANY FACILITY: 'ALVIN W. V0GTLE NUCLEAR PLANT, UNITS 1 AND 2 , i
SUBJECT:
MEETING
SUMMARY
- MILLETT FAULT STUDY A meeting was held at the NRC headquarters in Bethesda, Maryland on September 14, 1982. .The applicant was represented by Georgia Power Company, Southern Company
- Services, Inc. and Bechtel Civil and Minerals, Inc. The NRC was represented by the Division of Engineering (GSB, HGEB) and Licensing (LB-1), NRR. A list of
, attendees is enclosed. ^ Georgia Power Company requested this meeting to present its findings and ! conclusions in the Millett Fault Study, which is an extensive investigation
, program undertaken by the applicant in response to a U. S. Geological Survey Open File Report (82-156) that suggested the existence of a fault approximately seven miles southeast of the Vogtle facility near Waynesboro, Georgia.
During introductory remarks, the applicant emphasized that the purpose of the Millett Fault Study was to address the NRC's concern of whether or not a i capable fault (one that has moved once within the last 35,000 years or has nad multFmovements within the last 500,000 years) does indeed exist, not
~
i whether a fault does or does not exist. As an overview of the study, the applicant summarized its investigative program, followed by more detailed presentations '~ and discussions of acquisition of data, drilling, field geological exploration,
- geophysical studies, groundwater evaluation, groundwater modeling, surface l water hydrology and seismicity. The applicant concluded that none of its data and/or evaluations supported the existence of a capable fault. The final report will be submitted to the NRC in mid-October.
l Following the applicant's presentation, the staff commented that the overall program was excellent in scope and detail. The staff agreed that the' geological information, especially the stratigraphy as determined from core borings and
. down-hole geophysical logging, appeared to support the absence of a capable fault. However, the staff suggested the applicant discuss in greater detail the anomaly near Fix 13 found in'the seismic reflection records for the shallow reflector and review the evidence for the continuity of the deeper reflectors.
1 i 4
.-- -----_-,--.,,,,--.-__,,,.-,_-_,_m_,-,_.._,-.__--._.
Georgia Power Company The staff further requested that GPC: (1) provide the seismic reflection lines from the Savannah River Project, (2) use overlays of simulated with measured data on ~the pieziometric contour maps, and (3) compare the the USGS's measured pieziometric contour maps .f.or both aquifers with that produced by the applicant. The staff noted that upon receipt of the final report to the Millett Fault Study it would undertake a very rigorous, independent review, including appropriate contacts with local experts. During and/or following this review, a site visit and meeting would be held to discuss further details of the study. i If you have any questions concerning the above, please call J. Grant, Project Manager, at 301-492-7793.
.. 8 -
Jane M. Grant, Project Mar.ager Licensing Branch No. 1 Division of Licensing
Enclosure:
List of Attendees ; cc w/ encl.: See next page - I . 6 s
. - - - - - - . , - - . , - - - - - , - , , - , , , ,, - - . - - - - , . . - , - --r
e . Mr. Doug Dutton
.Vi'ce: President - Project- -
Management Georgia Power Company- - P. O. Box 4545 Atlanta, Georgia 30302 cc: Mr. L. T. Gucwa Chief Nuclear Engineer Georgia Power Company - P. O. Box 4545 Atlanta, Georgia 30302 Mr. Ruble A. Thomas Vice President '- Southern Services, Inc. ,
-P. O. Box 2625 Birmingham, Alabama 35202 Mr. J. A. Bailey Project Licensing Manager Southern Company Services, Inc.
P. O. Box 2625
-- Birmingham, Alabama 35202 George F. Trowbridge, Esq.
Shaw, Pittman, Potts and Trowbridge - 1800 M Street, N. W. Washington, D. C. 20036 Mr. D. O. Foster Georgia Power Company . . , P. O. Box 4545 - Atlanta, Georgia 30302 Mr. James P. O'Reilly ' Nuclear Regulatory Commission ,
. Region II -
101 Marietta Street, Suite 3100 Atlanta, Georgia 30303 . l , ! Mr. William S. Sanders l' Resident Inspector / Nuclear Regulatory Commission Post Office Box 572 Wayn.esboro, Georgia 30830 l { l **
~
l l . . . [ I _ _ ___ _ - - , . _ __ . - - _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ , _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ , _ . _ ._
~
Enclosure 1 - Attendees Meeting - Millett Fault Study September 14, 1982 NRC
- 1. Alterman -
J. Hopkins A. Ibrahim S. Brocoum R. Jackson D. Chery , R. McMullen ! J. Grant USGS . R. Morris ) Georgia Power Company
- 0. Foster Southern Company Services, Inc.
R. Thomas J. Bailey Bechtel
- J. Litehiser M. Wolff .
C. Farrell R. Blodmikar G. Segol C. Michniuk J. Cassidy T. Crosby
- K. Blom (Harding Lawson Assoc.)
L. Wood (S. S. Papadopulos & Assoc.) e 4 e O G
MEETING NOTICE Document Control (50-424 & 425) , A'.lG 111902 NRC POR L PDR TERA NSIC LB#1 Rdg. MRushbrook f Project Manager J. Grant E. Case D. Eisenhut/R. Purple T. Novak-J. Youngblood A. Schwencer F. Miraglia E. Adensam SSPB Branch Chief G. Lainas W. Russell D. Crutchfield T. Ippolito J. P. Knight W. Johnston D. Muller -
- 1. Speis '
R. Houston L. Rubenstein F. Schroeder M. Ernst J. Kramer Attorney, OELD OIE Regional Administrator, Region II ACRS(16) , 050(7) PARTICIPANTS (NRC): B. Ibrahim, P. Sobel, G. Lear,'J. Harris R. Jackson, (Region II), W.S. Brocoum,M), Sanders J. Grant, R. Vollmer, J. Knight, B. J. Youngblood (Region 11 K. Kiper
??1l j+ ,' v u
,- s i
/ o adwo,, UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION l' a
{ . ,I - WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555
\,*****$/ AUG 11 1962 Docket Nos.: 50-424 and 50-425 MEMORANDUM FOR: B. J. Youngblood, Chief, Licensing Branch No. 1, DL FROM: J. M. Grant, Project Manager, Licensing Branch No. 1. DL
SUBJECT:
MEETING NOTICE - PRESENTATION OF FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS TO MILLETT FAULT STUDY, ALVIN W. V0GTLE NUCLEAR PLANT, UNITS 1 AND 2 DATE AND TIME: Tuesday, September 14, 1982 9 am - 4 pm LOCATION: U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission 6110 Maryland National Bank Building 7735 Old Georgetown Road Bethesda, Maryland PURPOSE: Georgia Power Company representatives will present details of the "Millett Fault Study" as follows: Opening remarks R. Thomas Overview of study and C. McClure , conclusions M. Wolff Subsurface stratigraphy, T. Crosby mapping and other field studies Earthquake studies and surface J. Litehiser geophysical surveys Groundwater evaluation and C. Farrell computer modeling G. Segol Surface water hydrology J. Cassidy Review schedule /Open discussion PARTICIPANTS: Georgia Power Company I D. Dutton, D. Foster
. ~ .
,2 -
Southern Company Services *, Inc. : I R. Thomas; G. Grainger, J.< Bailey Bechtel Civil & Minerals, Inc. C. McClure, M. Wolff, T. Crosby, J. Litehiser, C. Farrell, G. Segol, J. Cassidy
~
NRC Staff
~
R. Vollmer, J. Knight, B. J. Youngblood, R. Jackson, S. Brocoum, I. Alteman, B. Ibrahim, P. Sobel, G. Lear, M. Fliegel, J. Harris (Region II), W. Sanders (Region II), J. Grant, K. Kiper
.!ho. l{ . ~ % AV
/
; une M; Grant, Project Manager Licensing Branch No. 1 )
Division of Licensing cc: See next page o t *
- /
- 7
WW
= , +
s
.b T
a 4 . 4, o- ,
- )
Mr. Doug Dutton i Vice President - Project ' ..'. . _ . . . . . ._. l Management - --
. . 1 Georgia Power Company .
l i P. O. Box 4545 -
- I Atlanta, Georgia 30302 l
cc: Mr. L. T. Gucwa . Mr. Thomas W. Crosby Chief Nuclear Engineer Bechtel Civil & Minerals, Inc.- Georgia Power Company Fifty Beale S'treet P. O. Box 4545 Post Office Box 3965 Atlanta, Georgia 30302 San Francisco', CA 94119 Mr. Ruble A. Thomas Mr. C. R. McClure
- Vice President Bechtel Civil & Minerals, Inc.
Southern Services, Inc. Fifty Beale Street ' ,'T P. O. Box 2625 Post Office Box 3965 Birmingham, Alabama ,35202 San Francisco, CA 94119 f Mr7 J. A. Bailey Mr. M. Wolff Project Licensing Manager Bechtel Civil & Minerals
- Inc*
Southern Company Services, Inc.
~
Fifty Beale Street . P. O. Box 2625 Post Office Box 3965 Birmingham, Alabama 35202 San Francisco, CA 94119
. George F. Trowbridge, Esq. -
Shaw, Pittman, Potts and Trowbridge 1800 M Street, N. W. Washington ~, D. C. 20036 9 Mr. D. O. Foster Georgia Power Company P. O. Box 4545 Atlanta, Georgia 30302' , Mr.' James P. O'Rei'lly Nuclear Regulatory Commission -
. Region II .
101 Marietta Street, Suite 3100
. Atlanta, Georgia 30303 Mr. WillianiS. Sanders Resident Inspector / Nuclear Regulatory Commission Post Office Box 572 Waynesboro, Georgia 30830 ,
t e ,
~
. 6
- t e
e
,,m.- - - m ,-w m-mw. , - .g. -y
* = 'w
..- -. -2 Mr. Jack Harris -"
- * - ~ ~
~
Nuclear Regulatory Commission 7~ Region'II
-101 Marietta Street, Suite 3100 Atlanta, Georgia 30303 -
Mr. Gerald S. Grainger Southern Canpany Services. Inc. Post Office Box 2625 Birmingham, Alabama 35202
~
Mr. Jeffrey Armbruster
- District Chief .
. U. S. Geological Survey
. 6481 Peachtree Industrial Boulevard Suite B Doraville, Georgia 30360 Mr. Robert Morris Engineering Geology ,
U. S. Geological Survey . MS-908 Reston, Virginia 22092 Dr. Walter Hayes . ! Deputy for Research Applications
' U. S. Geological Survey Office of Earthquake Studies 905 National Center Reston, Virginia 22092 I
l . 1 . I @ l .. l l \ e
1982
. MEETING
SUMMARY
AUG3
's Document Control (50-424; 425)
NRC PDR L PDR TERA NSIC LBil Rdg. , MRushbrook Project Manager JGrant Attorney, OELD OIE Regional Administrator, Region II PARTICIPANTS (NRC): RJackson SBrocoum h BIbrahim JGrant t vcu ~$
, aso g 0,, UNITED STATES e NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION j
a i wAsMNGTON, D. C. 20665
\...../ AUG 3 1982 Docket Nos.: 50-424
[ and 50-425 APPLICANT: Georgia Power Company FACILITY: Alvin W. Vogtle Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2 l
SUBJECT:
MEETING
SUMMARY
- MILLETT FAULT STUDY l
l A meeting was held at the NRC headquar' t ers in Bethesda, Maryland on July 28, l 1982.. The applicant, Georgia Power Company, was represented by R. Thomas l and J. Bailey of Southern Company Services, Inc., and C. McClure and T. Crosby of Bechtel Civil and Minerals, Inc. The NRC was represented by R. Jackson, S. Brocoum, I. Alterman, B. Ibrahim and J. Grant of NRR. J' The applicant requested this meeting to 1) present an overview of its "Millett Fault Study," 2) discuss a schedule for further meetings, more. technical in l nature, and 3) discuss submittal of its final report to the NRC. The Millett Fault Study is an extensive program undertaken by Georgia Power Company in response to a U. S. Geological Survey (USGS) Open File. Report (82-156) that [ suggested faulting to exist approximately seven miles southeast of the Vogtle facility in Waynesboro, Georgia. The applicant briefly discussed the scope of its investigative studies. General i areas included assemblage and evaluation'of existing data, generation of new data to address the presence or absence of faulting, and the use of studies l designed to address issues raised by the USGS Report. The applicant intends to present all data, evaluations and conclusions during a meeting to be held at the NRC in mid-September. At that time the appifcant will discuss all geologic, geophysical and hydrogeologic details of the study. If you have any questions, please call Jane Grant, Project Manager, at 301-492-7793.
-i. -4 -
.c , lit. . .J 4 Jane M. Grant, Project Manager Licensing Branch No. 1 Division of Licensing cc: See next page
, e u..' .
'Mr. Doug Dutton i Vice President - Project Management Georgia Power Company , ,
P. O. Box 4545
- Atlanta, Georgia 30302 cc: Mr. L. T. Gucwa .
Mr. Thomas W. Crosby Chief Nuclear Engineer Bechtel Civil & Minerals, Inc.- Georgia Power Company Fifty Beale Street P. O. Box 4545 Post Office Box 3965
.. Atlanta, Georgia 30302 San Francisco, CA 94119 Mr. Ruble A. Thomas Mr. C. R. McClure Vice President
- Bechtel Civil & Minerals, Inc.
Southern Services, Inc. Fifty Beale Street ' P. O. Box 2625 Post Office Box 3965 Birmingham, Alabama 35202 San Francisco, CA 94119 Mr7 J. A. Bailey Mr. M. Wolff Project Licensing Manager Bechtel Civil & Minerals, Inc. Southern Company Services, Inc. Fifty Beale Street P. O. Box 2625 Post Office Box 3965 Binningham, Alabama 35202 San Francisco, CA 94119 George F. Trowbridge, Esq. Shaw, Pittman, Potts and Trowbridge - 1800 M Street, N. W.
. Washington, D. C. 20036 Mr. D. O. Foster >
Georgia Power Company P. O. Box 4545 Atlanta, Georgia 30302 Mr.' James P. O'Rei'lly ' Nuclear Regulatory Commission - Region II ' 101 Marietta Street, Suite 3100
. Atlanta, Georgia 30303 Mr. William S. Sanders Resident Inspector / Nuclear Regulatory Commission Post Office Box 572 Waynesboro, Georgia 30830
=m e e
Mr. Jack Harris Nuclear Regulatory Connission Region II 101 Marietta Street, Suite 3100 Atlanta, Georgia 30303 Mr. Gerald S. Grainger . Southern Company Services, Inc. Post Office Box 2625 Birmingham, Alabama 35202 Mr. Jeffrey Armbruster District Chief U. S. Geological Survey 6481 Peachtree Industrial Boulevard Suite B Doraville, Georgia 30360
. Mr.- Robert Morris Engineering Geology U. S. Geological Survey MS-908
.Reston, Virginia 22092 ,
Dr. Walter Hayes
- Deputy for Research Applications U. S. Geological Survey Office of Earthquake Studies 905 National Center Reston, Virginia 22092 b
4 4 w*#
S y 4, - . 9 January 7, 1983 Docket Nos. 50-424 50-425 \ .
i . i APPLICANT: -Georgia Power Company FACILITY: Alvin W. Vogtle Nuclear Plant, Units 1/2
SUBJECT:
MEETING SU M ARY - MILLETT FAULT STUDY A meeting was held October 29, 1982 concerning the Millett Fault Study as applied to the Georgia Power Company Vogtle Plant. The enclosed meeting sunnary and attachments have been provided by A. K. Ibrahim of the Geosciences Branch.
/ Me anie A. Miller, Pmject Manager Licensing Branch f4 Division of Licensing. .
Enclosure:
As stated a
":, 2 Y c v ju ,
A LB#4 LB#4 omen,
...MMi1
.. . . .N.. . s..m .. EAden.;am suname >
M.../ ....l.5..r.uts
.. T/..(p ...../83
.-> ...,.. g /83 OFFiClAL RECORD COPY owa =>-.m ua hac renu sia co-son.acu am
V0GTLE Mr. Doug Dutton, Vice President Project Management Georgia Power Company P.O. Box 4545 Atlanta, Georgia 30302 cc: Mr. L. T. Gucwa. Chief Nuclear Engineer Georgia Power Company P.O. Box 4545 Atlanta, Georgia 30302 Mr. Ruble A. Thomas Vice President Southern Services, Inc. - P.O. Box 2625 Birmingham, Alabama 35202 Mr. J. A. Bailey Project Licensing Manager Southern Company Services. Inc. P.O. Box 2625 Birmingham, Alabama 35202 George F. Trowbridge, Esq. Shaw, Pittman, Potts and Trowbridge 1300 M Street, N.W. Washington, D. C. 20036 Mr. D. O. Foster Georgia Power Company P.O. Box 4545 Atlanta, Georgia 30302 Mr. Jares P. O'Reilly Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region 11 101 Marietta Street, Suite 3100 Atlanta, Georgia 30303 Mr. William S. Sanders Resident Inspector / Nuclear Regulatory Commission P.O. Box 572 Waynesboro, Georgia 30830
/ 'g$
UNITED STA S . Y2 8 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION s ; m em warow.o.c. noses \,
/
DEC 151982 Docket Nos: 50-424 50-425 MEMORANDUM FOR: M. Miller, Project Manager FROM: A. K. Ibrahim, Geophysicist Seismology Section Geosciences Branch, DE
SUBJECT:
MEETING SUPMARY - V0GTLE A meeting was held at the NRC Headquarters in Bethesda, Maryland on October 29, 1987. The applicant was represented by Southern Company Services, Inc. and their consultants. The NRC was represented by the Division of Engineering (GSB) and Division of Licensing (LB-1). A list of attendees is enclosed. Georgia Power requested this meeting to present their findings and conclusions regarding an anomaly neer Fix 13 which was raised by the staff (meeting sumary, September 23, 1982 attached). A detailed presentation of record sections and discussion with the applicant's consultant provided infonnation to support their position that there is continuity of the lower reflectors below the indicateo anomaly. Continuity of the lower reflectors indicate no displacement had occurred within the last 60 million years. We will continue to evaluate this information in our ongoing review and provide our conclusiens and supporting bases in the SER report. n
~
. 'W-A. .
Ira \ib,. Geophysicist Seisnology Section Geosciences B' ranch , cc: R. Jackson L. Reiter S. Brocoum I. Alterman P. Sobel
! 0 L- l
; 4 ;
)
/
Attendance List NRC Staff:
- E. Doolittle I. Alterman
. A. Ibrahim S. Brocoum R. Jackson P. Sobel Southern Services Company J. Bailey Bechtel T. Crosby 4
Western Geophysical Co. C. Savit= University of Georgia J. Henry u o e f 9 e J .I
, .-e,_- , - . , , ,- - , , - . _ - , . _ . . . , , . . , , , ,
o UNITED STATES
~
E n NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION y, jI wasMNGTON. D. C. 20SSS V..O ... $EP 2 31982 Docket Nos.: 50-424 and 50-425 . APPLICANT: GEORGIA POWER COMPANY FACILITY: ALVIN W. V0GTLE NUCLEAR PLANT, UNITS 1 AND 2 ,
SUBJECT:
MEETING
SUMMARY
- MILLETT FAULT STUDY A meeting was held at the NRC headquarters in Bethesda, Maryland on September 14, 1982. The applicant was represented by Georgia Power Company, Southern Company Services, Inc. and Bechtel Civil and Minerals, Inc. The NRC was represented by the Division of Engineering (GSS, HGEB) and Licensing (LB-1), NRR. A list of attendees is enclosed.
Georgia Power Company requested this meeting to present its findings and conclusions in the Millett Fault Study, which is an extensive. investigation program undertaken by the applicant in response to a U. S. Geological Survey
-- Open File Report (82-156) that suggested the existence of a fault approximately seven miles southeast of the Vogtle facility near Waynesboro, Georgis.
During introductory remarks, the applicant emphasized that the purpose of the Millett Fault Study was to address the NRC's concert, of whether or not a capable fault (one that has moved once within the last 35,000 years or has nad multiple movements within the last 500,000 years) does indeed exist, not whether a fault does er does not exist. As an overview of the study, the applicant summarized its investigative program, followed by more detailed presentations ard discussions of acquisition of data, drilling, field geological exploration, i geophysical studies, groundwater evaluation, groundwater modeling, surface water hydrology and seismicity. The applicant concluded that none of its data and/or evaluations supported the existence of a capable fault. The final report l will be submitted to the NRC in mid-October. . Following the applicant's presentation, the staff commented that the overall- - program was excellent in scope and detail. The staff agreed that the geological information, especially the stratigraphy as' determined from core borings and - - dowri-hole geophysical logging, appeared to support the absence of a capable
- fault. However, the staff suggested the applicant discuss in greater detail the anomaly near Fix 13 found in the seismic reflection records for the shallow g - reflector and review the evidence for the continuity of.the deeper reflectors. .
4 1
. . t" Georgia Power Company The staff further requested that GPC: (1) provide the seismic reflection lines from the Savannah River Project, (2) use overlays of simulated with measured data on the pieziometric contour maps, and (3) compare the the USGS's measured.
pieziometric contour maps for both aquifers with that produced by the applicant. The staff noted that upon receipt of the final report to the Millett Fault Study it would undertake a very rigoro~us, independent review, including appropriate contacts with local experts. During and/or following this review, a site visit and meeting would be held to discuss further details of the study. If you have any questions concerning the above, ~please call J. Grant, Project Manager, at 301-492-77.93.
. /.
. G/ W Jane M. Grant, Project Manager Licensing Branch No.1 Division of Licensing
Enclosure:
List of Attendees cc w/ encl.: See next page i l l o
F p* 4:0,
. "[ , c,o,, UNITED STATES y g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 5 j k{-..... ,/
DEC 151982 Docket Nos: 50-424 50-425 MEMORANDUM FOR: M. Miller, Project fianager FROM: A. K. Ibrahim, Geophysicist Seismology Section Geosciences Branch, DE
SUBJECT:
MEETING
SUMMARY
- V0GTLE A meeting was held at the NRC Headquarters in Bethesda, Maryland on October 29, 1982. The applicant was represented by Southern Company Services, Inc. and their consultants. The NRC was represented by the Division of Engineering (GSB) and Division of Licensing (LB-1). A list of attendees is enclosed.
)
Georgia Power requested this meeting to present their findings and conclusions regarding an anomaly near Fix 13 which was raised by the staff (meeting summary, September 23, 1982 attached). A detailed presentation of record sections and discussion with the applicant's consultant provided information to support their position that there is continuity of the lower reflectors below the indicated dnomaly. Continuity of the lower reflectors indicate no displacement had occurred within the last 60 millica years. , We will continue to evaluate this information in our ongoing review and provide our conclusions and supporting bases in the SER report. a f ~ A. . I rahih, Geophysicist Seismology Section Geosciences Branch cc: R. Jackson L. Reiter S. Broccum sL F mmstaft
F
. ~-en 'd-Attendance List ~
- NRC Staff:
E. Doolittle
.I. Alterman A~'. Ibrahim S. Brocoum R. Jackson Souther Power Company
.J. Baily Bechtel -
T. Crosby Weston' Geophysical Co. C.' Saint University of Georgia J. Henry I , i. i 4
g I o,, UNITED STATES
! n NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
{ ; WASHING TON, D. C. 20555
~
% ,,,,, / SEP 2 31982 Docket Nos.: 50-424 and 50-425 .
APPLICANT: GEORGIA POWER COMPANY FACILITY: 'ALVIN W. V0GTLE NUCLEAR PLANT, UNITS 1 AND 2 ,
SUBJECT:
MEETING
SUMMARY
- MILLETT FAULT STUDY.
A meeting was held at the NRC headquarters in Bethesda, Maryland on September 14, 1982. The applicant was represented by Georgia Power Company, Southern Company J Services, Inc. and Bechtel Civil and Minerals, Inc. The NRC was represented by
. the Division of Engineering (GSS, HGEB) and Licensing (LB-1), NRR. A list of attendees is enclosed.
Georgia Power Company requested this meeting to present its findings and conclusions in the Millett Fault Study, which is an extensive investigation program undertaken by the applicant in response to a U. S. Geological Survey
-- Open File Report (82-156) that suggested the existence of a fault approximately seven miles southeast nf the Vogtle facility near Waynesboro, Georgia.
During introductory remarks, the applicant emphasized that the purpose of the Millett Fault Study was to address the NRC's concern of whether or not a capable fault (one that has moved once within the last 35,000 years or has - had multiple movements within the last 500,000 years) does indeed ' exist, not whether a fault does or does not exist. As an overview of the study, the appitcant summarized its investigative program, followed by more detailed presentations and discussions of acquisition of data, drilling, field geological exploration, geophysical studies, groundwater evaluation, groundwater modeling, surface water. hydrology and seismicity. The applicant concluded that none of its data and/or evaluations supported the existence of a capable fault. The final report will be submitted to the NRC in mid-October. , Following the applicant's presentation, the staff commented that the overall program was excellent in scope and detail. The staff agreed that the geological information, especially the stratigraphy as' determined from core borings and
- down-hole geophysical logging, appeared to support the absence of a capable
.. fault. However, the staff suggested the applicant discuss in greater detail the anomaly near Fix 13 found in the seismic reflection records for the shallow reflector and review the evidence for the continuity of the deeper reflectors.
p _py s(s 8 w m=y > l l l
~
Georgia Power Company The staff further requested that GPC: (1) provide the seismic reflection lines from the Savannah River Project, (2) use overlays of simulated with measured data on the pieziometric contour maps, and (3) compare the the USGS's measured pieziometric contour maps for both aquifers with that produced by the applicant. The staff noted that upon receipt of the final report to the Millett Fault Study it would undertake a very rigorous, ~ independent review, including appropriate contacts with local experts. During and/or following this review, a site visit and meeting would be held to discuss further details of the study. If you have any questions concerning the above, please call J. Grant, Project Manager, at 301-492-7793.
. /.
w Jane M. Grant, Project Manager Licensing Branch No.1 __ Division of Licensing
Enclosure:
List of Attendees cc w/ encl.: See next page
~
e 6 6 e G t 6
UNITED STATES
,? k*g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMIS,.
$ WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 3
/7.
- j
\...../- *JAN 2 G YQ MEMORANDUM FOR: 4ThomasiM...Novak,CAssistant Director for for Licensing, NRR ,'
FROM: James P. Knight, Assistant Director for Components & Structures Engineering, DE
SUBJECT:
TRANSMITTAL OF GSB/HGEB STAFF REVIEW OF V0GTLE FAULT INVESTIGATION REPORT, " STUDIES OF POSTULATED MILLETT FAULT" Attached is the staff review of Georgia Power Company's report " Studies of Postulated Hillett Fault." The fault investigation was prompted by the U. S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 82-156 which postulated the existence of two faults of unknown age and capability; the Millett Fault inferred to be seven miles south of the Vogtle Electric Generating Plant, and the Statesboro Fault, 32 mi south of the plant. The report concludes that there is no evidence for the existence of a capable fault at the locations inferred in the open file report. The staff reviewcrs have determined that the conclusions in the report are consistent with the information as reported, and conclude therefore that ' no capable fault, within the meaning of Appendix A to 10 CFR Part 100, is present in the vicinity of the Vogtle plant. I Because of the variety of techniques utilized by the applicant in the investigation, several staff reviewers contributed to the evaluation of the report: from GSB, Dr. Ina B. Alterman, Ceclogist, reviewed all aspects of the geologic part of the investigaticn; Dr. A. Ibrahim, Geophysicist, evaluated the seismic reflection study; Dr. Phyllis Sobel, Geophisicist, reviewed the seismology part of the report; and Dr. D. Chery, Hydrologist frem HGEB reported on all aspects of the hydrologic part of the study. They may be contacted if there are any further questions. M Jam P. Kn* ht, As istant Director for C'mponents F Structures Engineering ' Di ision of Engineering
Attachment:
J As stated cc: See next page g , ,f gnn
t. JAN :! G 1383
'cc: 'w/ attachment R.' ^ Jackson -
.S.-Brocoum
; L. Reiter I -G. Lear I. Alterman l P. Sobel .
~A. K. Ibrahim ;
i- _ M.' F11egel' .
, D. Chery ' ?- M. Miller (PM)
). T.' Algermissen, USGS
'R. Morris, USGS A
e s t d i 1 - i 1 I i-r $~.
~
i p : E }. - f f . l+ c._:_-._-_--__ _-,_-~._._._..____._:_ __. _ _ - _ . - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . - _ _ _ _
+
f Review of Vogtle Report " Studies of Postulated Millett Fruit"
' I. Introduction ~
In October,1982, Georgia Power Company submitted to the NRC a report of
. a fault specific investigation entitled, " Studies of Postulatec Millett Fault."' The report is the result of a six-month investigation in response to Open File Report 82-156 (OFR) by Robert E. Faye and David C.
Prowell of the U. S. Geological Survey which postulated the existence of a fault of unknown age or capability seven miles south of the Vogtle Electric Generating Plant now under construction. The open file report further inferred a second fault, parallel with the first, about 32 miles south of the plant. These postulated faults, the Millett and Statesboro Faults, were the subjects of the utility's fault investigation, with the primary focus on the former which was closer to the plant. II. The Millett Fault: Description and evidence As interpreted by Faye and Prowell, the Millett Fault trends northeastward across the Savannah River, is approximately 40 miles long, and has vertically offset the buried Triassic / Cretaceous contact +600 ft on the southeast side of the fault. . The main evidence for the inferred fault came from a comparison of well cuttings taken several years before the 0FR study from two water wells, PSR and AL66. Interpretation of the lithic fragments suggested that Triassic rocks were present below -1100 ft in PSR, but above -600 ft in AL 66 four miles to the south. Further, an examination of surface and groundwater flow records over a period of forty years indicated some anomalous characteristics wh,ich Faye and Prowell interpreted as resulting from a subsurface barrier. By extrapolation from the Belair - Fault 35 miles to the north, the OFR inferred that an impermeable gouge zone above the postulated Millett Fault forced the south flowing groundwater from a lower aquifer to a higher one on the south side of the fault. As the trace of the postulated fault traverses a segment of the Sasannah River where a straight stretch of the river changes to a more characteristic meandering flow pattern, the 0FR considered this observation further support for the inferred fault. Evidence for the trend and length of the postulated faults was by extrapolation from other post-Cretaceous coastal plain faults in the southeastern United States. While no age of fa'ulting was suggested, the OFR indicated tha't rocks at least through the Eocene epoch (55-38 mybp (million years before the present)) were involved. III. Fault Investigation Inesmuch as the age and therefore capability of the inferred faults were undetermined, Georgia Power, through its licensing consultant, Southern
Company Services (SCS), undertook a vigorous investigetive progran to resolve-the issue, and engaged a team of eminent earth scientists .to guide and evaluate the direction and results of the investigation. A. Techniques SCS utilized a wide range of techniques to explore the surface and subsurface for both geologic and hydrologic information in order to locate and date the fault. Included in the study was (1) field geologic mapping, (2) aerial and Landsat imagery for remote sensing analysis, (3) core drilling.on both sides of the Savannah River and straddlino the interval of the two wells described in the open file . report, (4)
. petrographic, x-ray and heavy nineral analyses of core samples, (5) .
downhole ceophysical studies including gamma, neutron and electric logging,(6)seismicreflectionprofiling,(7)regionalgeophysicaland seismicity studies, (7) well water level monitoring, (8) ground water modelling, and (9) analysis of surface water flow. B. Staff Review Because of the wide range of techniques used, several flRC staff reviewers have contributed to this evaluation of the utility's report; a geologist covering the varied geologic investigations, a seismologist for the historic and present day seismicity of the area, a geophys1cist for the seismic reflection profiling, and a hydrologist reviewing the surface and ground water study. In addition, the geologist and one of the geophysicists have visited the site region with the NRC project manager and SCS staff to examine the cores drilled for this study, the stratigraphy, and various aspects of the surface features in order to have first hand experience in evaluating the fault investigation repost. C. Conclusions The concl'usion arrived at by the applicant, based upon the results of the study, is that there is no evidence for a capable f ault; and that if - there is a fault, which could not be detected by any of the technioues used by the applicant, it is older than 40 mybp. The staff agrees that this conclusion is consistent with the reported information and results of the various investigative techniques. IV. Summary of Fault Investigation and Results A brief surcary of these results and the applicant's views follow.
~
A. Geologic Background The plant and the postulated faults are located in the Atlantic Coastal Plain physioaraphic province. Except for river alluvium and gravels of Quaternary age (2 mybp-Present), the youngest, most extensively exposed formation in the region is the Hawthorn (or Altamaha) Formation of liiocene age (25-23 mybp). The oldest exposed rock, the Blue Bluff marl ' of.-the Lisbnn Formation, is a calcareous, silty, grayish fossiliferous _ _ - , . , - _ - . _. ., e ~ ,- . . _ ._,,. - . ,_
unit, distinctive in lithology and fauna, and of middle Eocene age (50-40 mybp). The marl is limited in exposure in the banks of the Savannah River which has begun to cut down through it. The Eocene formations rest unconformably on Paleocene (63-55 mybp) clays and black lignitic sands which are also distinctive. These overlie the late Cretaceous (96-63 mybp) Tuscaloosa Formation unconformably. The Cretaceous sediments are the oldest of the late Mesozoic (240-60 MYBP) marine transgression deposits that constitute the Coastal Plain covermass. In several places in the Piedmont, west and north of the coastal plain, Triassic down-faulted basins filled with distinctive Triassic sedimentary rocks and some Triassic-Jurassic basaltic igneous rocks are exposed. Similar basins have been recognized beneath the coastal plain. One such basin, the Dunbarton Basin, trending northeastward, has been identified on the basis of aeromagnetic anomalies and drilling for the Savannah River Plant. The Vogtle plant overlies the basin, close to the northern boundary. The southern boundary approximately coincides with the location of the postulated Millett Fault. As this basin is downfaulted, presumably into' Piedmont rocks, it is assumed that the rocks below and surrounding the basin are Precambrian (older than 570 mybp) and early Paleozoic (570-240 mybp) metamorphics. B. Geologic Investigation The geologic investigation included (1) field mapping and remote sensing to identify evidence for surface faulting; (2) core drilling with petrographic, x-ray and heavy mineral analysis of the strata in the cores in order to correlate layers from core to core to determine any offset of the strata; (3) downhole geophysical logging, which identifies individual strata by chara:teristic signatures that are dependent upon the physical properties of the rock units, also with a view to correlating the strata from core to core; and (4) review of other geophysical studies.
- 1. Field mapping and remote sensing techniques failed to uncover any evidence of surface faulting, or linear features indicative of surface or near surface rupture. Staff review of some of the original imagery used for the study and field checks in the site area verified this conclusion.
. 2. Twelve drill cores were taken along two parallel north-south lines, crossing the inferred trace of the Millett Fault, one in South Carolina close to the two wells studied by Faye and Prowell, and one in Georgia. Along both lines, one core was taken from the location closest to the trace of the fault and the others equally spaced north and south of the fault. Eight holes were cored in Georgia, about one mile apart north-south, and four in S.C. Visual examinations, petrographic and mineralogic analyses identified distinctive marker beds. One of these, the Blue Bluff marl,
appeared consistently between 100 ft above sea level to 100 f t below, showing no change in elevation (other than that due to the gentle regional dip to the south) on either side of the p'ostulated
- fault in Georgia and South Carolina. This indicates that no vertical offset and therefore no fault of the type postulated in the USGS open file ' report is present down to strata at least 40 my old at the inferred location of the postulated fault.
Furthermore, Core VSC-4, on strike with, and 200 ft from, well AL66 in which the USGS interpreted Triassic rocks at an elevation of
-600 ft, was the deepest hole in the study. The core at -1000' was still in distinctive Cretaceous Tuscaloosa sar.ds. The staff examined this core and agrees that it has none of the characteristics of Triassic. rocks and looks much like other Cretaceous samples. This result is in direct disagreement with the open-file report interpretation upon which the fault is postulated.
- 3. Downhole geophysical logs, especially the gamma log, provided distinctive signatures that verified the petrographic
-identification of.the strata, and in particular the Blue Bluff mari, confirming the continuity of the unit across the inferred location of the Hillett Fault. ,
C. Seismic Reflection Study A nineteen mile acoustical seismic reflection survey was conducted in the Savannah River in the vicinity of the postulated Millett fault. The survey used three different energy sources, Uniboom,10 cubic inch air gun and 20 cubic inch air gun, to obtain high resolution and deep penetration of the subsurface formations.. The water depth in which the survey was carried out ranges between 10-25 feet. The reflection survey identified several key horizons, A through I, at different depths ranging between +70 to -1150 feet. Some of the horizons, such as reflector E, which correlates with the top of the limestone that is the lowest unit in the Barnwell group, of Late Eocene age (40 HYBP), and reflector G, which represents the unconformable contact between the unnamed sands of the Middle Eocene Lisbon Formation and the top of the Paleocene kaolinitic clay (60 mybp) are well correlated with adjacent core holes. Some of the reflectors are well
' defined while others are weakly defined. Some of the horizons showed small'fe'atures which may be indicative of past channelization or buried karstic surfaces. The continuity of the reflectors above the Triassic / Cretaceous contact and the absence of noticeable displacement in the higher horizons above 2500 feet elevation indicate the absence of faulting within the last 60 million years in the vicinity of the .
postulated Millett fault. This conclusion is in agreenent with that of the applicant's report, that no capable fault has been identified by the seismic reflection data obtained for this study. In addition, seismic reflection data obtained by the applicant from the Savannah River Plant investigation of the deeper horizons in the
...o .
vicinity.of both plants suggest the possibility of a small normal offset of the Triassic / Cretaceous contact of 50-100 f t in the vicinity of the postulated fault. No evidence, however, for offset in younger horizons can be detected. D. Seismology Study The available seismicity information includes (1) felt earthquakes, (2) recent instrumentally located events, and (3) data from the Savannah River Plant array, just across the Savannah River from the Vogtle site. The applicant concludes that historic seismicity reveals no evidence of active faultino in the area. This conclusion is consistent with the data. The seismicity near the site has been scattered and low level (maximum t0 intensity VI). No clustering of earthquakes is occurring near the postulated Hillett or Statesboro faults. E. Hydrology Study Faye and Prowell used, as part of their case, several hydrologic
. arguments to support the existence of the postulated fault. These arguments were thoroughly investigated in this study by the applicant.
The issues of different unit base flows in river reaches (generally above and below the postulated fault), water well levels across the postulated fault, and ground water piezametric surface contours were addressed by their study. After carefully reviewing all the contractor's hydrologic evaluations, the staff concurs in their conclusien that the hydrologic data provide "no basis to support or preclude the existence of a fault." IV. Conclusions On the basis of (1) the continuity of strata across the inferred location of the postulated Millett Fault as determined by (a) drill cores, (b) ocwnhole gecphysical logging and (c) seismic reflection profiles, (2) the absence of Triassic rocks at levels above -1000 ft, as shown by drill core VSC-4 on the south side of the postulated fault, (3) the scattered and low level seismicity and (4) the hydrologic information which neither indicates nor disproves the presence of a fault, the applicant's report concludes that there is no evidence for the existence of a capable fault in the vicinity of the Vogtle plant. The staff has carefully reviewed the report, has visited the site and examined the cores, the logs, and remote sensing imagery, and field ,
. checked the surface features. The reviewers consider the applicant's conclusion to be consistent with the data as reported, and conclude, therefore, that no capable fault as defined in Appendix A to 10 CFR part 100 is present in the vicinity of the Vogtle plant, based cn all presently available data. Should new information become available, i.
will be evaluated during the review for the Operating Licerse (0L) fo-the plant.
t m
#pa ne jo,; UNITED STATES
! g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION j WASHINGTON, D. C. 20656 7.
% * * * * * +*
. JAN 121983 Docket Nos'. 50-424/425 MEMORANDUM FOR: Ina B. Alterman, Geologist Geosciences Branch Division of Engineering THRU:
Myron Fliegel, Leader, Hydrologic Engineering Section
-_. Hydrologic and Geotechnical Engineering Branch-l i /' Division of Engineering FROM: ' Donald L. Chery, Jr., Hydrologist Hydrologic and Geotechnical Engineering Branch Division of Engineering
SUBJECT:
HYDROLOGIC EVALUATION OF POSTULATED MILLETT FAULT NEAR V0GTLE ELECTRIC GENERATING PLANT I have completed my review of pertinent sections of.the report " Studies of Postulated Millett Fault", by Bechtel,.0ctober.1982. The USGS postulated a fault oear the Vogtle Electric Generating Plant and used, as part of their case,severalhydrologicargumentstosupportthepxistenceofthepostulated fault.. These arguments were thoroughly investigated by the contractor, Bechtel, who was engaged by Georgia Power Company. \The issues of different unit base flows in river reaches ( generally above and below the postulated faultlwaterwelllevelsacrossthepostulatedfault,andgroundwater piezametric surface contours were addrest d by their study. I carefully reviewed all the contractor's hydrologic tvaluations and concur in their conclusion that the hydrologic data provide "no basis to suppcrt or preclude the existence of a fault".
/ ,
/
Donald L. Chery, Jr. Hydrologist Hydrologic and Geotechnical
. Engineering Branch i Division of Engineering cc: J. Knight G. Lear i R. Jackson l
B. J. Youngblood l M. Fliegel
- M. Miller J.,, k 3
- D
- M s= M
-3
***3 s Ge: c a Power Creany o 3 }3 P +T*;t's 0%e":,e
**a~a Geo co 30308
% . cree 43; 226 '703 Ya Og Acress 80= C?'ce San 45J5 C a a Gee;a 303^2 g 4i Georgia Power fPe SAf."9'" e itCff C f v$?fm
- CA P't! cea!
October 15, 1982 Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation i Attention: Darrell G. Eisenhut Director Division of Project Management U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Cormnission - Washington, D. C. 20555 NRC DOCKET NUMBERS 50-424 AND 50-425 CONSTRUCTION PERMIT NUMBERS CPPR-108 AND CPPR-109 V0GTLE ELECTRIC GENERATING PLANT POSTULATE MILLETT FAULT REPORT 3
Dear Mr. Eisenhut:
Enclosed are 20 copies of the report titled " Studies of Postulated Millett i Fault" prepared.in response to the U.S.G.S. open-file report 82-156, which postulates the existence of the Millett Fault near the Vogtle Plant Site. The results of these studies described in this report conclusively demon-
+
strate that the Postulated Millett Fault is not capable. Therefore, it has no effect on the existing accepted seismic design bases of the Vogtle Electrical Generating Plant. The evidence suggests that no fault is present within the ' depth range of this investigation which includes geological beds from 40 to 80 million years old. A second conclusion is that no capable
, fault exist near the location of th Postulated State::bcro Fault.
. We appreciate very much the support and cooperation given by the NRC's staff
- during this investigation. The com.ments'and suggestions given were very beneficial in allowing us to bring this investigation to a conclusion.
l We also would like to thank your staff for agreeing to factor in the expedient
, review of this report into their busy schedule in order that this issue can be resolved as soon as possible.
r&nn d W JUNW
Mr. Darrell G. Eisenhut - October 15, 1982
~
Page 2 We kill continue to stay in close contact with your Licensing Project Manager and the NRC staff involved in this effort to expedite the completion of this review and resolution of this issue. Yours trul , Q Doug Dutton h Vice President Generating Plant Projdcts sw cc: R. A. Thomas D. O. Foster
- 0. Batum M. Malcom J. A. Bailey C. McClure G. F. Trowbridge '
J. M. Grant R. H. Vollmer J. P. O'Reilly W. F. Sanders L. T. Gucwa 9 0 P
.: .-e. ;(5 '
..u / .1 . oec<g a Power Company ,,
333 Pecmont Asence Attanta Georc a 303C8 - T6cenone C4 526-7703
.. Ma icg Address Pest CBce Sex 4545 -
Aff an'a. Georg a 30302 4i Georgia Power n, ,, og, ine scurnem eecuc s see<n
. V:co Pres cent October 15, 1982 Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Attention: Darrell G. Eisenhut, Director
- Division of Project Management 6.- U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission -
Washington, D. C. 20555
' -NRC DOCKET NUMBERS 50-424 AND 50-425 CONSTRUCTION PERMIT NUMBERS CPPR-108 AND CPPR-109 V0GTLE ELECTRIC GENERATING PLANT POSTULATE MILLETT FAULT REPORT l
Dear Mr. Eisenhut:
c
!! Enclosed are 20 copies of the report titled " Studies of Postulated Millett , Fault" prepared.in. response to the U.S.G.S. open-file report 82-156, which ,' postulates the existence of the Millett Fault near the Vogtle Plant Site. !' The results of these studies described in' this repc-t conclusively demon-p strate that the Postulated Millett Fault is not capable. Therefore, it has
[ no effect on the existing accepted seismic design bases of the Vogtle L Electrical Generating Plant. The evidence suggests that no fault is present
!- within the depth range of this investigation which includes geological beds from 40 to 80 million years old. A second conclusion is that no capable fault exist near the location of the Postulated p State:b' ore Fault.
We appreciate very much the support and cooperation given by the NRC's staff (: during this~ investigation. The coments 'and suggestions given were very beneficial in allowing us to bring this investigation to a conclusion. We also would like to thank your staff for agreeing to factor in the expedient review of this report into their busy schedule _in order that this issue can be resolved as soon as possible.
a . o , % -
,? .
*W.
Mr. Darrell G. Eisenhut - October 15, 1982
. Page 2 .
o We will continue to stay in close contact with your Licensing Project Manager and the NRCdtaff involved in this effort to expedite the completion of~this review'and rs olution of this issue. Yours trul , i I
~ -
L Doug Dutton 3 Vice President Generating Plant Projdcts sw y cc: R. A. Thomas t D. O. Foster l
- 0. Batum M. Malcom t-J. A. Bailey C. McClure G. F. Trowbridge '
J. M. Grant R. H. Vollmer J. P. O'Reilly eW. F. Sanders , t L. T. Gucwa l. e e 4 o qq' e
% g 9
m l s !
< ~
a* t ~~;
z , e
+ ' r": 2.
i kY , , , L., :.- pp _
*:oWD aY: . . - ~;;T : -
CALKED N f Lit: ( .$ k,,.._ 0F .h $ (, b_ ,_ , , _ ,
':011TE TO: i.:;F0h"ATIC.5 As, s -)N k *
"AIN SUT.rr:CT OF CALL: e q a Q w o w,,_ M ,1, g a,h,g k _ % ,
16;;iS Ut 9:US9D: , o, w ,,,d S. , k, M_
.. M 4 (.. _. .1. -h-. b kb._ ^ 6". -=
.h .h ^A M. MN ws. ..
~. .t Wk
.. C 4<A h .b.1 1 ,.4 s.lak<.fJ.A. %df<.,
_ we. 4'._0_aLW L.,_Q(L_sbsk. Is m . m A u g h . M d _ p t p u M ,.
. __d Q Ls b L.m A 4t .%Aeio
. g A .. M _ . Ra . 4 s _c..AA m_4sA 6 pie L
.qQL4 RA4. 44 % 6 M 40.s%L Et
%.m_6 A.-. 5a _b & AA4. J %. :A;- e-a44 .
nD.6._M.. .. ~.& k..~.%y ya RJ. . f ub..M..a. A.xa, of 4 -Qu.a.AL is, 6L. W ep-JAn...A '4L._q-4b_As.pc.bs , i l' ( i 1 l l
- Et%q UNITED STATES
} .
;,/..-
[ i , e, kg
& .g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ,' -
~ '
y ; wasmuoros. o. c,20sss
,7 * %, u . . ,/
2 1983 .~,~
/
( SEP
/ff , , ,.; V '
' ~
Docket Nos. 50-424/425 EMORANDUM FOR: R. E. Jackson, Chief, Geosciences Branch, 0 G. E. Lear, Chief, Structural & Geotechni il
%W!/NILLL g
Engineering Branch, DE R. L. Ballard, Chief Environmental an Hydrologic Engineering Branch, DE ~ L. G. Hulman, Chief, Accident Evaluation Branch, O I ! F. Congel, Chief, Radiological Assessment Branch, I W. H. Regan, Jr., Chief, Site Analysis Branch, DE \ W. P. Gammill, Chief, Meteorology and Effluent Treatment Branch, DSI FROM: Elinor G. Adensam, Chief Licensing Brsnch No. 4 \\s\ '< Division of Licensing -
'\
\
SUBJECT:
ACCEPTANCE REVIEW OF THE V0GTLE, UNITS 1 AND 2 ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT Georgia Power Company tendered an application for an operating license on June 30, 1983. The Environmental. Report was tendered August 31, 1983. , Your assistance in performing an acceptance review is requested. Copies j are now being distributed. If you have not received a copy by September 12, 1983, please have your reviewers contact Melanie Miller \ (A24259). ..
- - - - -_ t, You are requested ,
October 10,1983.;,to If you forward the results have identified of yourinformation additional acceptance that review by will be required for your detailed review, this should be described in in the forma't of re"asts for additional information using the NRC staff numbering system th- identifies the cognizant branch /section and the number of each rt. est from that branch /section. No Environmental Project Manager or Environmental Review Coordinator will be assigned to this project. Therefore, any requests for additional information resulting from your review should be submitted to T. Novak from yourAD as is done in the safety review. A& ' % Elinor G. Adensam, Chief Licensing Branch No. 4 Division of Licensing g5
# o
',, UNITED STATES
~ , _ h .,., ( g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION -!, . c. ,
v wasMNGTON, D. C. 205S5
.,.- , ,. g
.[. .
- DEC 2 1N ,
MEMORANDUti FOR: Robert E. Jackson, Chief Geosciences Branch, DE THRU: p h Stephan Brocoum, Leader w Geology Section, GSB, DE FROM: Ina B. Alterman, Geologist . Geology Section, GSB, DE
SUBJECT:
VISIT TO V0GTLE PLANT REGION On November 22 and 23,1982, A. Ibrahim and I made a visit to the site region of the Vogtle Electric Generating Plant to examine drill cores and surface features relative to the Millett Fault Study conducted by Georgia Power. We were accompanied by Jane Grant, former Vogtle project manager for NRC now of Region I, Jim Bailey and Gerald Grainger of Southern Company Services and Tom Crosby of Bechtel. During our visit we flew over the area by helicopter, travelled by car to visit the Belair Fault exposure, toured the Savannah River in a small boat, and examined some of the drill cores obtained for the tault study. Dr. Ibrahim also made a site visit which he will report on separately. In the afternoon of November 22 we toured the area by helicopter, flying south frorn the Augusta airfield along the Savannah River, circled around the plant, then continued along the river and circled several times that stretch across which the Millett Fault is postulated to be located. We then continued eastward and circled the two wells, P5R and A166, which were used by the USGS to interpret the presence of a fault, making several passes to examine the surface features between them. Following this, we flew northwestward to the Belair Fault, a northeast trending fault, the trace of which is northwest of Augusta. The USGS Open-File Report 82-156 postulates the Millett Fault to ' cross
- the Savannah River about seven miles south of the Vogtle plant, where a relatively straight stretch of the river ends in a series of meanders.
Except for this change in channel characteristics we did not observe any i surface evidence for a fault. In the area between the two wells, P5R and A166, there were no surface features or linear characteristics indicative of a fault. Flying over the trace of the Belair Fault in the vicinity of the gravel l pit where the fault was first discovered, I noted that the only surface evidence for the fault was the rectilinear west bank of two aligned ponds. Viewing the ground surface to the northeast and southwest, no linear features or other topographic evidence of a fault was observed. On the ground, a small surface exposure in the gravel pit juxtaposes g,y , , ,, 4 M y ,J (77%/ /( ! ; +. t . - , . . . . .. s,.... . _ . . , ., ., b
9
. ~
^
DEC 2 1 1992 variegated Cretaceous sands and clay and bleached white sheared phyllite of Paleozoic age. Very little else is observable, as the trenches dug by the USGS when the feult was first discovered were filled. The next day, we examined the drill core VSC-4 located on strike with, but a few thousand feet west of. AL66, the well cuttings of which were used by the USGS to postulate the existence of a fault. The core bottomed at 1024 ft in the dark gray sands of the Cretaceous Tuscaloosa
. Formation. The USGS has interpreted the cuttings of AL66 to indicate Triassic sediments at a depth of. 600 ft. This suggested a fault, as the Triassic from a well to the north, P5R, indicates the Cretaceous Triassic boundary at about 1000 ft depth. In this context, the VSC-4 drill core is of critical significance.
We then examined the riverbanks of the Savannah River, travelling southward in a small power-driven, flat-bottomed boat, looking for evidence of stratigraphic offset or deformation of surface materials indicative of young faulting. In the vicinity of the postulated fault, only river alluvium is exposed on the banks. These were clearly undisturbed. While the absence of observable surface structures does not, by itself, disprove the existence of a fault, our observations verified statements in the applicant's fault investigation report that no surface evidence of faulting is present in the vicinity of the postulated fault.
.h--
Ina B. Alterman, Geologist Geology Section Geosciances Branch, DE 4 f g u . uo ., _ 4
~>em *
<em
, op . . m , . ~ + w amo.o va - o L
/ UNITED STATES
'o,)
.["
. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g* f4 l . WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 .
\;44/
NOV 16 1982 MEMORANDUM FOR: John Rebello Administrative Contracts Branch Division of Contracts
' 1[
FROM: Robert E. Jackson, Chief Geosciences Branch, DE ,
SUBJECT:
V0GTLE SITE AREA - SHARING OF OPERATIONAL COST OF UTILITY AIRCRAFT Dr. Ina B. Alterman and Dr. A. K. Ibrahim of the Geosciences Branch will be visiting the Vogtle Plant area in the vicinity of Augusta, Georgia on November 22 and 23, 1982 in order to field check a fault investigation report. Geologic observations using a helicopter owned by Georgia Power Company will be conducted on November 22. NRC will' assume its pro-rata share of the flight cost which is estimated at $250.00 For further information, contact Mr. James Bailey of Southern Company Services, which manages Georgia' Power's nuclear plant licensing. He may be reached at 205-870-6823.
. $4'{l, 4: RobertE.pa son, Chief Geosciencys ranch c
Division Engineering cc: S. Brocoum I. Alterman - A. K. Ibrahim - s
. .__ u __
~ ~
A n!IIGi. ,,Q p^
- -4&i TrW7v I b
I g j, f V U Bechtel Civil & Minerals,Inc. gineers-Constructors [, , Fif ty Beale Street
/ .
I< j San Francisco. ahf~ ia u..u aaress e 3965 San Francisco CA 94119 f l' f .. f j l e 20, 1982 J Dr. Abou-Bak e K. Ibrahim i U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commissih i , P. 514 Washing ton, D.C. 20555
Dear Dr. Ibrahim:
As requested during the September 14, 1982 Millett Pault Study meeting in Bethesda I am forwarding you the seismic reflection lines from the Savannah River Plant. Please find enclosed: the replay sections for the refraction lines in the vicinity of the Postulated Millett Fault, the time cross sections, the top Triassic, Saprolite, and Crystalline rock contour maps, and the velocity gradient map. Also enclosed for your benefit are two reports iscued as part of the reflection studice. All this information is available through the Oak Ridge, Tennessee repository. I hope that this supplementary data along with the Bechtel report-Studies of Postulated Millett Fault-aids your review. I am looki..g forward to the October 29 meeting in Bethesda with you and our geophy:ical consultants and hope we can resolve your concerns about the Savannah River reflection survey Fix 13 anomalies. If I can be of any further assistance please contact me at 415/768-7297. Donald Michniuk DM/j t . Enclosure-ccr Beth Dolittle Jim Bailey l' t a' M
.c .;ca.u :. . .
.f. w -..x:-,- . .... # ,,. % , . . , , . . , . _ _,.. o _ ._ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ . _ _ , , , , _ _ _ _ _ - _
i UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR GEOLOGICAL SURVEY EFFECTS OF LATE CRETACEQUS AND GN0 ZOIC FAULTING ON THE GEOLOGY AND HYDROLOGY OF THE COASTAL PLAIN NEAR THE SAVANNAH RIVER, GEORGIA AND SOUTH CAROLINA Open-File Report 82-156 y- . e,- c . e n ~ ~
- Q s - J w v.J/ /
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR GEOLOGICAL SURVEY EFFECTS OF LATE CRETAGOUS AND GN0 ZOIC FAULTING ON THE GEOLOGY AND HYDROLOGY OF THE COASTAL PLAIN NEAR THE SAVANNAH RIVER, GEORGIA AND SOUTH CAROLINA By Robert E. Fays and David C. Prowell Open-File Report 82-156 l Doraville, Georgia 1982 I
e UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR JAMES G. WATT, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Dallaa L. Peck, Director
\
+
9 i For additional information write to: - U.S. Geological Survey 6481 Peachtrca Industrial Boulevard, Suita B Doraville, Georgia 30360
CONTENTS Page Abstract........................................................... 1 ' I Introduction....................................................... 3 l l Acknowledgments............................................... 5 Geology............................................................ 6 Regional stratigraphy and 11t hology. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 C rys t al li ne rock s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 T ri as s i c ro ck s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Co as t al Plain sed i me n t s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Geo l o gic se ct ion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Structure..................................................... 24 Faulting.................................................. 24 Hydrology.......................................................... 30 Aquifer definition............................................ 30 Aqui f e r p a rame t e rs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 Potentiometric surfaces........... ........................... 34 A l aq ui f e r . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 A2 aquifer................................................ 44 G r oun d-wa t e r f 1 ow. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .'. . . . . . . . 50 Lateral f10w.............................................. 50 Ve rt i c al f 1 ow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 Aquif er dis charge to the Savannah Rive r. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 Summa ry and con c lu s ions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60 Selected references................................................ 62 S u pple me n t al inf o rma t io n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71 Hap location of well-data points.............................. 71 iii
ILLUSTRATIONS Page J Figure 1. Map showing location of study ares.......................... 3
- 2. Map showing outcrop areas of Upper Cretaceous through middle Eocene sediments and critical data-collection sites....... 6
- 3. Geologic section along line A-A' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
- 4. Map showing altitudes at base of Coastal Plain sediments... 12
- 5. Map showing point transmissivity of the Al aquifer. ..... . .. 32
- 6. Map showing inferred predevelopment potentiometric surface of the Al aquifer disregarding the effects of faulting on ground-water flow, based on 1945-81 wate r-level data. . . . . 37
- 7. Map showing inferred predevelopment potentiometric surface of the Al aquifer indicating suggested effects of faulting on ground-water flow, based on 1945-81 water-level data..... 42
- 8. Map showing inferred predevelopment potentiometric surface of the A2 aquifer disregarding the effects of faulting on ground-water flow, based on 1945-81 water-level data.. 44
- 9. Map showing inferred predevelopment potentiometric surf ace of the A2 aquifer indicating suggested effects of faulting on ground-water flow, based on 1945-81 water-level data.. 46 TABT2S Table'1. Generalized correlation of stratigraphic,11thologic, and Sq ui f e r un i t s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
- 2. List of 30-day, 2-year low flows at selected stations on
. the Savannah River, Brier Creek, and Ogeechee River, Ga. , and the South Fork of the Edisto River, S.C. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 iv J
-.c-~. ~ ..-,a_., . , _ , , _ , - , _ _ , . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ , , , _ , , . . . , , . . _ _ , , , , . . . . . , _ , . . , , . . , - _ , . _ . ,
CONVERSION FACTORS For readern who may prefer to use the International System (SI) of units, rather than inch-pound units, the conversion factors for terms used in this report are listed below Multiply inch pound unit By To obtain SI (metric unit) ft (foot) 0.3048 m (meter) f t/s (foot per second) 0.1048 m/s (meter per second) ft /d 2 (feet squared per day) 0.0929 m2/d (meters squared per day) mi2 (square mile) 2.590 km2 (square kilometer) V
e EFFECTS OF LATE CRETACEOUS AND CEN0 ZOIC FAULTING ON THE GEOLOGY AND HYDROLOGY OF THE COASTAL PLAIN NEAR l THE SAVANNAH RIVER, GEORGIA AND SOUTH CAROLINA by Robert E. Faye and David C. Prowell ABSTRACT Coologic and hydrologic investigations by the U.S. Geological Survey have defined stratigraphic and hydraulic anomalies suggestive of faulting within Coastal Plain sediments between the Ogeechee River in east-central Georzia and the Edisto River in west-central South Carolina. Examination of borehole cuttinas, cores, and geophysical loss from test wells indicate that Triassic rocks and Upper Cretaceous and lower Tertiary Coastal Plain sediments near the Barnwell-Allendale County line near Millett, South Carolina, are offset by a northeast-trending fault downthrown to the northwest. The location of this suspected Coastal Plain fault generally . coincides with the location of an inferred fault in basement rocks as interpreted from aeromagnetic surveys. Apparent vertical offsets range from about 700 feet at the base of Upper Cretaceous sediments to about 20 feet in strata of Late Eocene age. As a result,- the Upper Cretaceous Middendorf Formation which directly overlies crystalline and Triassic rocks updip (northwest) of this fault, is absent immediately downdip of the fault. The thickness of Upper Cretaceous sediments is also sharp 1v reduced f rom about 700 feet to about 180 feet across the f ault. 1 L
Sediments of the basal Coastal Plain aquifer are largely truncated by uplifted Triassic rocks at the fault near Millett, South Carolina. I.ateral ground-water flow near the Savannah River is consequently dis-rupted updip of the fault and ground water is transferred vertically into overlying sediments and possibly into the Savannah River. At several locations, abrupt changes in potentiometric head occur across this fault. Computed transmissivity of the basal Coastal Plain aquifer is also radically reduced downdip of the fault, sharply reversing a down-dio trend of rapidly increasing aquifer transmissivity. Other anomalous potentiometric data along a northeast-trending line between Statesboro, Georgia, and Fairf ax, South Carolina, suggest the possibility of similar faulting in correlative geologic units. The location of the suspected fault near Statesboro, Georgia, generally coincides with the eastward extension of the Gulf Trough, a regional potentiometric anomaly in central Georgia. 2
INTRODUCTION - Investigations undertaken as part of the it.S. Geological Survey's Southeastern Atisatic Coastal Plain Regional Aguifer Systems Analysis (RASA) have defined anomalous geologie and hydraulic data suggestive of recurrent faulting within Coastal Plain sediments in east-central Georgia and west-central South Carolina. The general area of study is hordered to' the west anA cast by the Ogeechee and Edisto Rivers, respectively (fig.1). Potentiometric anomalies and radical changes in Figure 1.--(Castion on next page) belongs near here. aquifer transmissivity and in aquifer discharge to area streams were observed within parts of two regional Coastal Plain aquifers comprised of i sediments of Late Cretaceous and early Tertiary age. Site-specific investigations of subsurface lithology were consequently ' undertaken to deternkne the origin and nature of the observed anomalies. Detailed analyses of borehole cuttings, geophysical loss, and palynological data at well sites adjacent to and along a line generally parallel to the - Savannah River indicated the presence of faulting of Triassic rocks and Coastal Plain sediments near Millett, S.C. Cretaceous sediments are verties11y offset approximately 700 f t, probably by en echelon reverse f aulting similar to that previously observed along the Melair f ault zone near Augusta, Ca., by Frowell and O'Connor (1978). Northeast-trending potentiometric anomalies and limited geologic' data , imply the presence of another fault which offsets correlative Coastal Plain sediments between Statesboro, Ca. , and Fairf ax, S.C. 3
m I h 1 i i, f . i I Figure 1.--Location of study area. 4 4 \ ,_
The purpose of this paoer is to describe and, where possible, quantitatively document the geologic, hydrologic, and hydraulic ef fects of f aulting of Coastal Plain sediments within the study area. The geology and hydrology of regional aquifers are briefly described to provide bases for interpretation. Data sources and interpretive methods unique to various aspects' of this study are discussed selectively in the text. Methods pertinent to the mao location of well-data noints are described in the Supplemental Information section at the end of the report. Acknowledraents The authors extend their thanks to I. Wendell Marine of the E.I. duPont de Nemours Company, Savannah River Laboratory, and gratefully acknowledge the use of data, borehole cuttings, and facilities at the Savannah River Plant (SRP). We siellarly acknowledge the use of facilities and cuttings at the South Carolina Coological Survey and the Georgia Coologic Survey. The authors particularly acknowledge the pelynological identifications contributed by Raymond A. Christopher and Norman 0. Frederiksen of the U.S. Geological Survey. ' Appreciation is also extended to Ralph F. Crawford for cartographic organization, Rebekah Brooks for final map compilation, and Patricia J. Bentley and Mary D. Ballew for assistance in preparation of this manuscript. 5
GEOLOGY The emerged Coastal Plain in the vicinity of the Savannah River is a southeastward thickening wedge of semiconsolidated to unconsolidated strata of Cretaceous to Holocene age. The strata, in general, dip gently to the southeast; hence, "down dip" as used in this report means " southeastward". Outcrop areas of Cretaceous through middle Eocene sediments critical to this study are shown in figure 2. The inner margin of the Coastal Figure 2.-(Castion on next page) helongs near here. Plain noted in figure 2 is the updip limit of Upper Cretaceous and lower Tertiary sediments and is defined by the exposed unconformable contact between crystalline rocks and Coastal Plain sediments. The stratigraphic correlation of Coastal Plain sediments within the study area to contea-paraneous sediments of the Atlantic and Culf Coastal Plains is illus-trated in table 1. Lithologic units described in table 1 pertinent to Table 1.- (Cantion on page 8) belones near here. the Savannah River area refer to the geologic section of Coastal Plain sediments shown in figure 3. L Figure 3.-(caption on page 9) belongs near here. i i 6
.. .. - . . - . . . . . . _ - - - . . -.. . .-... _ . . . . ~ . . . . - ._. . .- . . . . - .. . . . - - -
I L i l' i ( I... l' > t
- p. , t i.
P r 4 P k l
. . .r i
i l i e i Fisrure 2.-Aterop areas of Upper Cretaceous through middle Eocene sediments ~ ! i and critical data-collection sites. r e s t e 4 P P b I 9 I ,f . 4 I r 7 7 44+**+pgwey- mq9e < p. e r m sp + p-r g.W ee &W .. e emw gqw e.eppyw gereer-+s. heqLMe W
Table 1.--Ceneralized correlation of stratigraphic,11thologie, and souifer units
Figure 3.--Ceologic section along line A-A'. 9
Regional Stratigraphy and Lithofogy Crystalline Rocks Palaosoic crystalline rocks that include gneiss, schist, quart-site, and granites of the Kiokee belt and metavolcanic rocks of the Little River Series of Crickasy (1952) underlie Coastal Plain sediments within the updip parts of the study area (LeGrand and Purcron,1956; Siple,1967; Prowell and O'Connor,1978; Marine,1979). The age of the Belair belt of the Little River Series was established as Paleozoic (probably Cambrian) from a trilobite found near Augusta, Ga. (Maher, 1981). The ages of the Klokee belt and the remaining Little River Series are also considered Paleozoic. Crystalline rocks crop out within the study area north of the inner margin of Coastal Plain sediments and downdip in the channels of larger streams (fig. 2). Crystalline rocks unconformably underlie Cretaceous Coastal Plain sediments downdip to a line extending approximately from Wadley in southern Jefferson County, Ga., to Williston in Barnwell County, S.C. The upper 10 to 100 ft of the crystalline rock both in the exposed Piedmont and in the subsurf ace northwest of this line is typically saprolite. Saprolite is formed by the in place weathering of crystalline rock with the preservation of the relict texture of the parent rock. Saprolite can be distinguished from the overlying poorly consolidated - Coastal Plain sands and gravels by nineralogy and texture and commonly by abrupt changes in the trends of electrical resistivity and spontaneous potential curves of bore-hole geophysical logs. South of the line from Wadley to Williston, drill-hole data defining the nature of the crystalline rocks are unavailable. Drill holes penetrating the Cretaceous st' rata in this region bottom in unmetamorphosed red beds. 10
Triassic Rocks Moderately to well-indurated interlayered dark-red claystones, siltstones, sandstones, and f anglomerates are present in the subourface between the crystalline basement and the Cretaceous Coastal Plain strata generally southeast of the line between Wadiry, Ca. , and Williston, S.C. These rocks are interpreted as river and lake deposits formed in a continental environment. The fanglomerate layers, particularly those in the cores from well P5 and the cuttings from well AL-66 (fig. 3), contain an assortment of rock fragments that have been derived f rom other rock units. Greenschist clasts similar in 11thology to the rocks labeled Pz3 on figure 3 have been found in the samples from AL-66 and they indicate the presence of an anposed crystalline terrane during erosion and deposition. No fossils have been recovered from these red beds but by analogy vith similar tocks in the Eastern United States, they are probably of Triassic to Early Jurassic age. In this report, these red beds are referred to as Triassic rocks, or rocks of Triassic age. A weathered zone typically less than 50 f t thick is commonly present at the top of the Triassic red beds. The contact between Triassic rocks and overlying sediments can be distinguished by lithologic changes and is commonly characterized on electric logs by a relatively sharp reduction i in electrical resistivity and spontaneous potential compared to the poorly consolidated overlying Cretaceous sands and gravels. The geology and hydrology of Triassic rocks which underlie the SRP (Savannah River Plant) have been extensively investigated to evaluate 11
4 i e their storage potential for radioactive vastes. Results of these studies are described by Christi (1964), Marine (1973; 1979), and Marine and Siple (1974). Lithologic and geophysical drill-hole data in ti.S. Coological Survey f11as from South Carolina and Georgia were examined by the authors to determine the altitude of the base of Cretaceous Coastal Plain sediments. Individual data points with designation of pre-Cretaceous rock type in the drill holes are shown in figure 4. 1 Figure 4. -(Caption on next page) belongs near here. Coastal Plain Sediments Coastal Plain sediments within the s.tudy area range in age from Late Cretaceous through early Tertiary and form a seaward thickening, wedge-i shaped section of poorly consolidated lithologic units. Successively i e e I 12 l
~ . _ . .. _ _ - . . - . . _ , . . . _ _ _ _ . . _ . , _ _ , . _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . . . _ _ _ , _ . . _, _ . . _ . . _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ , _ . . _ , , _ _ _ . . _
C 1 Figure 4.--Altitudes at the base of Coastal Plain sediments. O 13-j
younger sequences of sediments crop out generally seaward of older sedi- ' ments and generally dip at a correspondingly smaller angle. Only Upper Cretaccous through middle to upper Tertiary sediments are considered in detail in this study. Upper Cretaceous fluvial and marine sediments of Santonian to Maestrichtian age ure:onformably and continuously overlie Paleozoic crystalline or Triassic sedimentary rocks throughout most of the study area. These sediments were formerly considered contemporaneous with the i. Tuscaloosa Formation of Alabama and southwest Georgia (LeGrand and Furcron, 1956; siple,1067), but are now known to be younger and contemporaneous
,, with the Middendorf, Black Creek, and Peedee Formations of South Carolina (Raymond A. Christooher, U.S. Geological Survey, written commun., 1980-81).
Sediments of Campanian and Maestrichtian age correlative with the Black , Creek and Peedee Formations are subsequently termed the Black Creek (?) i Formation in this report. Sediments of the Upper Cretaceous Middendorf Formation (table 1) comprise the basal part of the Cdastal Plain downdip to approximately the southern boundaries of Burke County, Ca. , and Barnwell County, S.C., where they are abruptly terminated (fig. 3). Downdip from this area, for an undetermined distance, the basal Coastal Plain is probably comprised of sediments correlative with those of the Riack a. Creek Formation of eastern South Carolina. Sediments of the Middendorf and Black Creek (?) Formations are difficult to differentiate updip of the SRP and are characterized by poorly consolidated, kaolin-rich, fine- to coarse-grained sands and i 14 1
- , _ _ , _ _ . - - _ , , _ _ _..__..._,,_,.m__ . . . _ _ _ , , , _ _ _ _ _ _ _ , , _ , _ . _,
_ . , . ,,-..__.--.-.~,,___.._y,, , . . . _
r t gravels. These sediments are irreaularly crossbedded and commonly contain
' discrete, generally discontinuous layers of kaolin and lenses of well-rounded quarts gravel. A sone of oxidation and weathering marks the Middendorf-Black Creek (?) contact. Sediments of the Black Creek (?)
Formation are _ typically marine and are comorised of well-bedded, fine-to coarse-grained, clayey sand containing significant quantities of carbonaceous material. This unit is generally a fining-upwards sequence of sands and silty clays the uoper part of which contains thin commercial Arade kaolin deposits. Basal sediments of the Middendorf Formation at the SRP and probably
, elsewhere consist of a semiconsolidated sandy clay overlying a tan to buff-colored indurated silty to sandy clav (Marine and Siple,1974).
The entire basal section of semiconsolidated clay ranges in total thickness from about 40 to 150 f t and is characterised on electrie logs as a zone of low electrical resistivity which contrasts sharply with overlying highly resistive, poorly consolidated coarse sands. The basal and upper
, units of the Middendorf Formation and the sediments of the Black Creek (?)
Formation are designated UK1, UK2, and UK3, respectively, in table 1 and in figure 3. Unconformably overlying the Upper Cretaceous sediments throughout most of the study area is a continuous dark-gray to black, sandy, lignitic micaceous elay. The basal part of this unit consists of gray to bluish-gray, clayey quarts sand and gravel. Dcwndip of the SRP, these sediments
, 15
, r M- .
.W. / q
, >4-
/
change facies to s' carbonaceous earl. Siple (1967) formally named this unit die Ellenton Formation and suggested that it is probably contempo-
~
raneous with youngest Upper Cretaceous or lower Paleocene sediments observed elsewhere in South Carolina. Core samples of what is probably s-the E11enton Formation were obtained from the site of Georgia Power
/
NCompany's Plant Vogtle in Burke County, Ga. , near TW-1 (figs. 2 and 3). Palynological analyses of these samples establish the age of the sUiments as early to middle (Midwayan) Paleocene (Norman 0. Frederiksen, C U.Si Geological Survey, written commun. ,1980) which is the age assignment
- p. -> .s used for 't he Ellenton Formation in this report.
~
t i
, . Lower to middle Paleocene sediments occur only in the subsurface
; within the study area, generally seaward of a line between Louisville in
, , s
, Jef ferson County, Ga. , to Jackson in Aiken County, S.C. , and range in thickness
.from a few feet to more than -150 f t. The upper contact of these Paleocene sediments is distinguished lithologically by the generally massive, lignitic clay in the upper part of.the unit and on geophysical logs as a zone of low electrical resistivity and relatively high natural gamma radiation. Sediments of early to middle Paleocene age are labeled P1 in table 1 and in figure 3.
l' Sediments of late Paleocene to early Eocene (?) age occur only in the subsurfaciG generally seaward of a lire between Perkins in Jenkins County, ! 4 - l* Ga. , and Barnwell in Barnwell County, S.C. These sediments are charac-terized by c'alcareous,' partially auconitic, fine- to coarse-grained quartz' sand within a matrix of light gray to of f-white calcareous clay. O k$ 16
'N
'34 19 i w i$
11,
,--J , , ,- , , - - , , . - - - - - , - - - - - , - , , , - - - , - , , - . - - - , , - - - , ,, , - - - , . - - , , - . - -
Downdip these sediments' undergo a facies change to sandy limestone and
~
limestone. The maximum thickness of this unit within the study area is about 100 f t. Sediments of late Paleocene and early Eocene (?) age are designated P2 in table 1 and in figure 3 and are possibly contemporaneous with the Black Mingo Formation described by Siple (1975). Sediments of middle Eocene (Claibornian) age unconformably and dis-l l continuously overlie Upper Cretaceous sediments throughout updip parts l l of the study area and continuously overlie Paleocene sediments downdip in the subsurface. These sediments are contemporaneous with the Hatchetigbee, Tallahatta, and Lisbon Formations of southwest Georgia (Cederstrom and
, others,1979, table 1), the Huber Formation of central Georgia (Buie, 1978), and' the "Claiborne undifferentiated" unit and the McBean Formation in South Carolina described by Siple (1955; 1967). The McBean Formation as defined by Herrick and Counts (1968) is contemporaneous only with the uppermost outcropping sediments of middle Eocene age. Updip of McBean I
- Creek (Burke County, Ga.), sediments immediately underlying the McBean
; Formation of Herrick and Counts (1968) were formerly considered part of the Upper Cretaceous. They are now known to be middle Eocene and are assigned
\, to the Huber Formation. Sediments of youngest middle Eocene age (McBean Formation) crop out in eastern Georgia in the valley of McBean Creek 1-near its confluence with the Savannah River in Richmond County and f in the valley of Brier Creek in northern Burke County. Older sediments l-of middle Eocene age (Huber Formation) crop out within a belt extending from northern Jef ferson County, Ca. , to northern Aiken County, S.C. (fig. 2). l Undifferentiated sediments of middle Eocene age crop out in South 17 We-- - p.-- ,e,.- + - - - , -y- 3 7- i. .. , y. , -- - - , .,,---7,,.- ,- . - ,.. ,or----. -mwy.. _. ,e,., -y. m,, , . _m ..ww, -----.,__
]
Carolina in the valleys of Holley Creek, Upper Three Runs Creek, Town Creek, Ties Branch, and Tinkers Creek in Aiken and Barnwell Counties ! l (fig. 2). Within updip parts of the study area (fig. 2) the lowermost sediments of middle Eocene age are lithologically similar to the underlying Upper Cretaceous sediments and consist of fine- to medium grained, unconsoli- , dated kaolinitic quartz sand, clayey silt, and beds and lenses of commer- ' cial grade kaolin. The uppermost middle Eocene sediments consist of green glauconitic, sandy ma'r1 and beds of impure and silicified, fossiliferous limes tone. Downdip in the vicinity of the SRP, sediments of middle Eocene age are comprised largely of calcareous sands and sandy limestones. Generally south of Burke and Jef ferson Counties, Ga. , and Barnwell County, S.C., middle Eocene sediments undergo abrupt facies changes to a sandy limestone and limestone, reaching a maximum thickness of about 300 f t. Where possible, sediments of middle Eocene age are subdivided lithologically in table 1 and in figure 3 into units El and E2, E3, and E4. Sediments of late Eocene (Jackson) age overlie middle Eocene sediments in
.3 mos t of the study area. These upper Eocene sediments are contemporaneous
.i* with the Ocala Limestone (Herrick and Counts, 1968; Siple 1955, 1967:
- s
, Huddleston and Hetrick,1979) and the Santee Limestone (Hazel and others, l- 1977) and have traditionally been called the Barnwell Formation. Upper Eocene sediments updip are diaracterized by red to tan clayey sands, green to gray carbonaceous clay, and calcareous sands containing thin fossiliferous limestone beds. Updip the calcareous sands and limestones which form the basal part of the upper Eocene sequence are lithologically distinct 18
-- - --*---o -,- ~ , _ y. -- . . -
from the underlying green sandy marl of youngest middle Eocene age. Downdip this distinction is less apparent as both middle and upper Eocene sediments undergo facies changes to sandy limestone and limestone. Upper Eocene sediments are designated E5 and E6 in table 1 and in figure 3. t Il 4 19 I l
Geologic Section
~
Borehole cuttings, cores, and geophysical logs from selected control wells were analyzed to delineate the lithologic and stratigraphic characteristics of geologic units along the line A-A' shown in figure 2.
~
The geologic section shown in figure 3 illustrates the stratigraphic and structural relationships derived from the data analyses. Control wells not directly on the line of section were projected to the line over the shortest horizontal distance. Structure contour maps by Siple (1967) and Prowell and O'Connor (1978) indicate that the Coastal Plain strata strike northeast and the line of section is generally parallel to true dip in t the Coastal Plain strata northwest of well P5. Southeast of well AL-66, however, beds strike more easterly reflecting the influence of the Cape Fear arch (not shown in fig. 2). This change in strike and the northward divergence of control wells AL-19 and AL-23 from the section line results in an apparent but false flattening of sedimentary units seaward of well AL-66. Geologie units of similar lithology, texture, and age are represented
, on the section by informal letter and number designations. This method of classification designates specific geologic units without the geologic connotations of regional formation names. For purposes of comparison, however, the names of correlative geologic formations have been included in the geologic section explanation and in table 1. Various geophysical ^
logs used in conjunction with the examination of the borehole cuttings and in the extrapolation of geologic contacts between wells are shown with the control wells on the section. In the preparation of the geologic section, lithologic logs of borehole cuttings were compared with the corresponding 20
geophysical logs to better establish the position of lithologic contacts and to provide information about sample contamination due to downhole caving. The inaccuracy of the samples, however, may result in a + or - 10-foot error in the position of any contact shown in figure 3. Paleontologic control points are shown on well columns P-1 and TW-1 in the section but evidence of the age of other units is commonly derived by extrapolation of data from surf ace outcrops and other drill holes. Two previously reported f aults and their related lithologic dis-continuities are shown in figure 3. The Belair fault, previously described by Prowell and O'Connor (1978), is a zone of reverse f aults which vertically of fset Santonian (Upper Cretaceous) sediments about 40 f t near well MZ-1 (fig. 2). At this locality, Piedmont crystalline rocks are faulted over Coastal Plain strata along a high angle reverse fault trending to the northeast.. Subsequent erosion has removed the Coastal Plain strata from the upthrown block exposing metavolcanic crystal-line rocks. The crystalline rock - Triassic rock contact in the sub-surf ace at the SRP was described by Christl (1964), Siple (1967), and
. Marine and Siple (1974) as a normal fault of undetermined total displacement.
This fault forms the northwestern border of the "Dunbarton" Triassic basin (Marine and Siple,1974) but it displaces only pre-Cretaceous ro cks. Therefore, the line on the geologic section representing this fault terminates at the base of the Cretaceous Coastal Plain strata. The following section of this report contains a more detailed discussion of structural features within the study area. The positions of correlative sedimentary contacts at control wells P5 and AL-66 (fig. 3) initially indicated anomalous dip changes 21
t in the Coastal Plain strata. Well AL-66 is 3.5 mi southeast (downdip) of well P5 and both wells bottom in Triassic rocks. The Triassic rocks in these walls have a distinctive dark red color from oxidation and contain distinctive clasts of crystalline greenschist (probably from unit Pz3 in fig. 3) in the fanglomerate layers. The presence of these fanglomerates ! l distinguishes the Triassic rocks from highly weathered overlying Cretaceous strata, which also could be highly oxidized. The Cretaceous-Triassic contact northwest of well P5 dips about 50 f t/mi to the southeast and is i l at a depth of 1,056 ft below sea level in well PS. The depth of the ; correlative contact in AL-66, however, is 485 f t below sea level. A straight-line connection of these points requires that the contact dip northwest at 163 ft/mi between wells PS and AL-66. Similarly, the - Cretaceous-Paleocene contact in well PS is 350 f t below sea level, whereas in well AL-66 it is 310 f t below sea level. This contact typically dips
~ about 40 f t/mi to the southeast but a straight-line connection of these points between wells P5 and AL-66 requires that it dip 11 f t/mi to the l
northwest. Similar anomaleous dip's vetld result from straight line 'e extrapolations of younger sedimentary units deposited in different sedimentary environments. Although dip reversals in sedimentary environments are not uncommon, dip reversals of this magnitude and extent are highiy unlikely. The anomalous stratigraphic conditions between wells P5 and AL-66 are more reasonably explained by faulting which has uplif ted the landmass downdio of well PS. For this reason, a previously unreported l fault (the Millett fault in fig. 3) is postulated between wells PS and AL-66. l The exact position of the Millett fault between wells P5 22 j
and AL-66 is not known, but its position in figure 2 was determined by available potentiometric data (figs. 6 to 9) and the abrupt change in the meander pattern of the Savannah River. The proposed Millett fault displaces the Triassic-Cretaceous contact approximately 700 f t vertically and is shown as a reverse fault suggesting a geometric similarity to the Belair reverse fault at Augusta, Ga., and the Cooke and Helena Banks reverse f aults reported near Charleston, S.C. (Behrendt and others,1981). The amount of disylacement suggested by correlative geologic contacts has been estimated by projecting the contacts to the fault line at the same dip recognized in the equivalent contacts updip- of well P5. As discussed previously, the dip of the Coastal Plain strata southeast of well AL-66 is not true dip and, therefore, the slope of the contacts could not he used in the extrapolation of units from AL-66 to the f ault plane. Localized dhanges in the dip of. the Coastal Plain strata may shif t the position of the intersections of the geologic contacts with the suggested fault plane and the value of any displacement measurement may vary by 10 to 20 f t. The correlation of units between wells PS and AL-66 suggests that successively younger strata are displaced to a lesser degree. Unit UKt on the geologic section (fig. 3) and probably all of unit UK2 are not . represented in the sedimentary sequence on the southeast (upblock) side of the Millett fault. This suggests that these units either never existed on the unblock or they were eroded after some stage of Cretaceous f aulting. Similarly, subsequent movement. along the fault has resulted in the thickening of some units on the northwest (downblock) side of the fault, but the displaceeents were too small to completely exclude their upblock counter-4 parts. These conditions suggest that the Millett fault was active spas-i modically, if not continuously, from the Cretaceous through the late Eocene. 23
Structure Contour maps by Siple (1955, fige. 4 and 9: 1967, pls. 4 and 5) and Prowell and O'Connor (1978, figs. 2 and 3) show the configuration of the unconformity at the surface of " basement rocks" and the top of Upper Cretaceous sediments in most of Aiken and Barnwell Counties, S.C., and Richmond County, Ga. The strike of the basement rock surface in this region is about N. 66* E. and the dip is about 30 to 35 ft/mi to the s outheas t. The top of Upper Cretaceous sediments strikes similar to the basement surf ace but dips at a rate of about 15 to 20 f t/mi to the southeast. Altitudes of the base of Cretaceous Coastal Plain sediments and designations indicating underlying rock types are shown in figure 4. Many of the irregularities shown in figure 4 are probably the result of erosion and deposition. However, abrupt changes in the altitude of the basal . Coastal Plain unconformity provided a basis for Prowell and O'Connor
-(1978) to delineate the Relair fault zone near Augusta, Ga. Similar abrupt changes in the altitude of this unconformity near the Barnwell County-Allendale County line in South Carolina provided initial evidence f for the existence of the Millett fault.
Faulting The Belair f ault zone near Augusta, Ga. (Prowell and O'Connor, 1978) is a zone of northeast-trending, high angle, en echelon reverse faults that i L-displace Upper Cretaceous and younger sediments near the inner margin of the Coastal Plain (fig. 2). A segment of the Belair fault zone is shown on the geologic section near well MZ-1 (fig. 3). Southwest of this locality, Prowell and O'Connor (1978) reported that the fault displacements 24
reach a maximum of about 100 f t in Upper Cretaceous ' strata and about 40
~
f t in upper Eocene strata. This evidence suggests at least two episodes of fault movement. Prowell and O'Connor (1978) also reported that the fault plane dips about 50* to the southeast and is marked by a thick, clayey gouge zone. Southeast of the Belair fault zone, Marine and Siple (1974) described the northwest contact of Triassic and crystalline rocks at the SRP as a Triassic basin border fault and reported seismic reflection data which i indicated no offset of the basal Cretaceous unconformity. The seismic data substantiated previous examinations by Marine '(1973) of lithologic
- and geophysical data from boreholes across the fault. Seismic reflection data on the southeast. side of the SRP, however, were reported by Marine (1973) to show some apparent discontinuities at the Cretaceous-Triassic unconformity.
Siple (1967) considered the radical changes in nstural gamma radiation levels shown on the aeromagnetic map of Petty and others (1965) at the southern end of the SRP to be indicative of faulting at the southeastern i border of the buried Dunbarton Triassic basin.of Marine and Siple (1974). t l- Based on essentially the same aeromagnetic data supplemented with seismic 'i B refr' action data, Daniels (1974) inferred the location of a basement fault in the same general location. The fault noted by both Siole and Daniels is generally coincident with the proposed Millett fault. Unlike the northwestern ' border f ault of the Dunbarton basin, the l l Millett fault offsets Cretaceous, Paleocene, and Eocene strata overlying the Triassic red beds. Evaluation of the drill-hole samples of these sub-horizontal Coastal , Plain units provides evidence related to the vertical 25 l '
movement of the fault but there are no critical markers to define amounts of horizontal movement. Measurement of the vertical displacement of the dated geologic units shown in figure 3 indicates that movement has diminished through geologic time. The 700-foot offset at the base of the Santonian (80 m.y. old) unit UK1 suggests a displacement rate of about 8 or 9 f t per million years, whereas the 220-foot offset at the base of the late Campanian (70 m.y. old) unic UK3 suggests a displacement rate of about 3 f t per million years. Similarly, the suggested 20-foot offset of the upper Eocene (40 m.y. old) unit E6 suggests a displacement rate of only 0.5 ft 4 per million years. These rates are very similar to rates calculated for other Cretaceous and younger faults in the Southeastern United States (Wentworth and Mergner-Keefer,1981). The Cooke fault and the Helena Bank.s fault (not shown on figures) of Behrendt and others (1981) are northeast-trending reverse faults near Charleston, S.C. The Cooke fault has been recognized by seismic reflection profiling northwest of Charleston and the Helena Banks fault has been recognized in of fshore seismic surveys. The geometry of these faults and the reported characteristics of the Belair fault zone (Prowell and O'Connor,1978) provided a basis for describing the geometry of the !, -Millett f ault, which is shown in figure 3 as a reverse fault steeply dippink to the southeast. The Millett fault strikes about N. 50' E. and probably exceeds 40 mi in length. If the Millett fault is similar to the Belair fault zone, the Coastal Plain strata should be drag-folded adjacent to the fault plane, particularly in units UK 1, UK2, UK3 , and P1 (fig. 3). l 26
l l l l By analogy, the Millett fault plane in these units is probably marked by a clayey gouge zone 0.5 to 1.5 ft thick. The characteristics of Cretaceous and younger reverse faults in carbonate rocks are unreported. The position of the Millett fault at the southeastern margin of the Dunbarton Triassic hasin suggests that it may be a reactivated zone of weakness that formed in pre-Cretaceous time. However, the margins of Triassic basins, such as the northwest border of the Dunbarton basin, are characteristically normal faults and the evidence from regional fault ; l studies mentioned previously would strongly suggest that the Millett i , fault is a reverse fault. Reverse reactivation of a normal fault at the southern margin of the Dunbarton hasin would require that the area be l l downthrown to the southeast whereas the geologic section (fig. 3) indicates that the area is upthrown to the southeast. Therefore, simple reactivation l of an old normal fault seems unlikely. An alternate explanation would be that the Dunbarton basin was a half-graben during the early to middle Mesozoic with a fault at the dorchwest border. Subsequent Cretaceous and l Cenozoic reverse fault movement along the Millett fault would have resulted in the present basin geometry as a full graben. j Anomalous potentiometric data in Bullock and Screven Counties, Ga., 1 and in Hampton County, S.C. , (figs. 6 to 9) seem to be extensions of and coincident with a northeast-trending band of potentiometric anomalies extending across most of the Georgia Coastal Plain. This feature was l. l first recognized as part of the principal artesian aquifer of Georgia by l l 9 27 i
Herrick and Vorbis (1963) and was referred to as the Gulf Trough. Geologic investigations of the Gulf Trough be Gelbaum (1978) and Crsmer and Arden (1980) described the trough as a narrow, fault-bounded, excessively thick, belt of Cretaceous and younger sediments characterized through most of its length by abrupt, downdip changes in notentiometric head and to some degree by downdip changes in ground-water quality (Zimmerman,1977). Downdip projection of the base of the Coastal Plain sediments shown in the geologic section (fig. 3) to the vicinity of the potentiometric , anomaly described above suggests that the top of pre-Cretaceous rocks in the vicinity of the Screven-Effingham County line in Georgia should be approximately 2,100 f t below sea level. Examination of borehole cuttings from test well GGS-855 (fig. 2) in southern Screven County, Ga. . . indicates that the well was drilled to a depth of 2,547 f t below sea level but did not bottom in " basement" rocks as reported. The hole probably bottomed in the indurated unic UK1 shown in figure 3. This increase in thickness of the Coastal Plain strata and the similarity of the potentiometric
?
data to that along the general strike of the Gulf Trough suggests that at least one side of the Gulf Trough may extend as far east as Hampton County, S.C. .. Such an extension implies that geologic conditions near the Screven- 4 Effingham Co. line in Georgia are similar to those at the Millett f ault and suggests that a similar fault is nresent in this area with the s.otheast block downthrown. This proposed fault is informally named the " States-I boro" fault in this report for its oroximity to the town of Statesboro in Bulloch County, Ga. The Millett and Statesboro faults thus border a 28
- g rw
relatively upthrown block approximately 40 mi wide and of unknown length. . The upward motion of this block from the Cretaceous through the Eo'cene has affected both the distribution and lithology of strata over-lying the block. Such effects, in turn, should influence aquifer hy-draulics and regional. patterns of ground-water flow. }
- a O
f 29
MYDROLOGY Aquifer Defitition ' The sediments described previously can ,he subdivided into regional aquifers and confining zones based on lithology, areal extent, and stratigraphic and lithologic continuity. Regional aquifers of interest to this study. include a basal Constal Plain aquifer comprised almost entirely of Upoer Cretaceous sediments of the Middendorf and Black Creek (?) Formations and an overlying aquifer comprised of sediments of late Paleocene through middle Eocene age. The hasal Coastal Plain aquifer is, to a large degree, spatially equivalent to the occurrence of Upper Cretaceous sediments and is bounded at the bottom by contact with 4 crystalline rock saprolite, the weathered Triassic rocks, or the semi-consolidated and indurated silty clay of the basal Middendorf Formation. The upper boundary of this aquifer is generally coincident with the occurrence of lower Paleocene sediments. In the vicinity of the SRP, basal sands and gravels of early Paleocene age are considered part of the basal Coastal Plain aquifer. The relatively thick lignitic clay of early Paleocene age is an areally continuous confining zone which separates the basal Coastal Plain aquifer from the overlying aquifer comprised of upper Paleocene through
- . middle Eocene sediments. This overlying aquifer is, in turn, partially i.
confined at the top by the glauconitic clay and marl of youngest middle Eocene age (McBean Formation). 30
Where sediments of middle Eocene age directly overlie Upper Cretaceous sediments in updip parts of the study area, the basal Coastal Plain aquifer is discontinuously confined by thick beds and lenses of kaolin and other clays near the base of the middle Eocene sediments. The aquifer comprised of middle Eocene sediments in this area is locally confined by basal clays of the upper Eocene Barnwell Formation. For discussion purposes, the regional aquifers and confining zone will be designated as Al, A2, and C1. Correlation of this nomenclature with* defined lithologic units is listed below and shown in table 1. Lithologic correlation [ Refers to table 1 Aquifer and
- Confining Unit Description and figure 31 A2 Regional Coastal Plain aquifer, P2, El lower Tertiary sediments of ,
late Paleocene to middle Eocene age i Cl Regional confining zone, lower P1 Tertiary sediments of early and middle Paleocene age Al Ba' sal regional Coastal Plain UK2, UK3, basal P1 aq uifer, largely sediments of Late Cretaceous age 31
,_,_.m _ ,_ , , . - , - - - _ - . _ _ . - - . . . _ . - , , - , - , . , , , , - _ - - - - - _ _ , ,
Aquifer Parameters Aquifer-test data pertinent to the Al aquifer in Richmond and Burke Counties, Ca. , were reported by Bechtel Corporation (1973), J. E. Sirrine Co. (1980), and W. G. Keck and Associates (1965). Corresponding data for Aiken and Barnwell Counties, S.C., were reported by Mayer (1972) and Siple (1955; 1967). Hydraulic parameters pertinent to the A2 aquifer and younger lower Tertiary sediments at the SRP are described by Siple (1975), Marine and Root (1976: 1978), and Root (1977). Additional time-drawdown data pertinent to wells in both Georgia and South Carolina were obtained from U.S. Geological Survey data files. Hydraulic characteristics of Paleozoic and Triassic rocks at the SRP are described by Christl (1964) and Marine (1979). Point values of transmissivity of the Al aquifer are shown in figure 5. All values were computed using time-drawdown or time-recovery data. Although these data are pertinent only to discrete parts of the Figure 5.--(Cantion on next page) belongs near here. acuifer they are considered representative of relative spatial changes in transmissivity within the study area. In Georgia, Al aquifer transmis-sivity increases rapidly downdip from about 3,000 f t 2/ day in northeastern Richmond County to about 30,000 f 2t / day in east-central Burke County. Similarly, in South Carolina, Al acuifer transmissivity changes from about 12,000 ft 2/ day in Aiken Co. to about 30,000 f t /2 day at the SRP. 32
Figure 5.--Point transmissivity of the Al aquifer. i i I l I 33 i h i
Transmissivity of the Al aquifer seems to be greater than'20,000 f t 2/ day throughout most of the SRP. Transudssivity of the restricted Al aquifer downdip of the Millett fault is about 6,000 f t / 2day based on measurements near Martin and near Millett in Allendale County. Thus an established downdip trend of rapidly increasing aquifer transmissivity is sharply reversed across the Millett f ault; probably due, in large part, to the observed " fining upward" character of the Black Creek (?) Formation and the 60-percent reduction in aquifer thickness which occurs across the fault (fig. 3). Results of aquifer tests pertinent to the A2 aquifer at the SRP are reported by Siple (1955) and by Root and Marine (1978). Transmissivity of this aquifer seems to be variable and ranges from about 8,000 f t 2/ day to about 13,000 ft2/ day. The larger transmissivities were observed in wells open to limestone and sand. Transmissivity of the McBean Formation, which comprises the upper zone of confinement of the A2 aquifer, is probably less than 100 f t 2/ day. Potentiometric Surfaces l Potentiometric maps in this report are intended to portray predevelop-ment or unstressed conditions. Potentiometric data actually used were l collected during 1945 to 1981. Where data were available for multiple time i periods, only the earliest data or data otherwise believed to be most l representative of predevelopment conditions were used in this study. l Additionally, the authors believe that, with minor exceptions caused by local l pumping or long-term natural stress, potent'iometric heads changed little or not at all within the study area during 1945 to 1981. Unpublished water-i 34 l l L
J 1evel records which indicate that Al aduifer potentiometric heads ~ within Georgia have changed little from 1945 to present (1981) support this belief. Similarly, in South Carolina, long-term water-level hydrographs published by Marine and Routt (1975) and Root and Marine (1978) indicate annual water-level fluctuations of about 5 to 10 f t occurred in the Al aquifer from 1951-77 due to local pumping and seasonal stress, but no long-term water-level changes were. observed in the vicinity of the SRP or near Williston, S.C. These published hydrographs are considered indicative of seasonal and long-tern Al aquifer potentiometric changes in the vicinity of the SRP in South Carolina and Georgia and are probably indicative of Al aquifer head changes throughout most of the study area. Local water-level changes within the Al aquifer at the. SRP observed in production wells or in wells near production wells ranged only from about 5 to 30 f t and were generally less than 15 f t from 1952-60 (Siple, 1967). The SRP is probably the major single user of ground ' water within the study area. Local ds lines in potentiometric heads related to the industrial use of ground water have been recognized within the Al aquifer, near the cities of Hampton and Varnville in Hampton County, South Carolina. Similar water-level declines within the Al aquifer have likely occurred near the ! city of Allendale, S.C. j Potentiometric heads pertinent to the A2 aouifer also have remained 1 generally constant with time. Continuous water-level hydrographs pub-lished by Siple (1967) and Root and Marine (1978) indicate that seasonal 35 I
water-level changes of about 10 f t occurred in sediments of middle Eocene age at the SRP during the periods 1951-60 and 1973-77. Siple (1967) indicates that local pumping and long-term natural stress from 1952-60 resulted in total water-level changes within the A2 aquifer ranging from about 10 to 18 ft. Unpublished water-level records for eastern Georgia also indicate generally constant A2 aquifer potentiometric heads. However, since 1979 local water-level declines have occurred west of Waynesboro in Burke County and northwest of Louisville in Jefferson County, probably in response to the ura of ground water for crop irrigation. Potentiometric data for both aquifers within and immediately downdio of their respective outcrop areas indicate that direct or nearly direct hydraalie continuity exists between the aquifers and larger streams. Consequently, in these areas, stream altitudes determined from 71/2-minute topographic maps were utilized to provide additional definition of the potentiometric surfaces. 1 i e 36
Al Aquifer The altitude of the Al aquifer potentiometric surface at individual , control wells is shown in figure 6. These data suggest that the Al aquifer regional potentiometric surface within and proximate to the outcrop areas l of aquifer sediments (fit. 2) is generally symmetrical to the axis of the l Savannah River and is, to a large degree, a subdued expression of surface topography. Potentiometric heads within this area range in altitude from about 500 f t near the inner margin of the Georgia Coastal Plain to about 150 ft near the 9avannah River. Corresponding values in South Carolina range in altitude from about 300 to 150 f t, res pectively. Potentiometric gradients are consistently toward the larger streams and are generally greatest within the outcrop areas and proximate to the larger streams. . Lateral potentiometric gradients toward the Savannah River northwest of i the Millet f ault only gradually decrease downdip toward the f ault and range from about 30 f t/mi in the. outcrop area to about 5 f t/mi at the SRP. The configuration of the inferred predevelopment potentiometric surface shown in figure 6 is based entirely on control well data and the Figure 6.--(Caption on next page) belones near here. _ observed sensitivity of potentiometric altitudes to the proximity of the 1 rivers and streams. Potentiometric contours were drawn disregarding geologic evidence of faulting and aquifer truncation described previously, and the Millett and Statesboro faults are shown on the map only for reference purposes. l 37
1
. Figure 6.--Inferred predevelopment potentiometric surface of the Al aquifer L
disregarding effects'of faulting on ground-water flow, based on 1945-81 water-level data. ? l l-l l l I-38 l i l u
The potentiometric surface near the Savannah River northwest of the Millett fault is not well defined by point potentiometric data. Avall-able data do, however, indicate a downdip narrowing of contours in the vicinity of central Burke County, Ga., that requires the 150-foot contour to either cross the Savannah River near the Millett fault or closely parallel the river channel to the southeast. Potentiometric contours less than 150 f t cross the river upstream of the Millett fault and form a distinctive "V" pattern symmetrical to the river. Downstream, potentiometric contours less than 150 f t cross the Savannah River and form an inverted "V" pattern also generally symmetrical to the river. This distinctive contour pattern l near the Savannah River is shown diagrammatically below and was first described by Siple (1960; 1967) as a " saddle" pattern. More recently, LeGrand and Pettyjohn (1981) utilized the same description of a potenti-omstric " saddle" (Miple,1960) to demonstrate a model of confined ground-water flow throurh undisturbed, homoclinally arranged Coastal Plain sediments and postulated the widespread existence of " saddles" with's
- Coastal Plain aquifers of the Southeastern United States and elsewhere.
Potentiometric maps of the principal artesian acuifer in Georgia have been conciled by Mitchell (1981) and Johnson and others (1980; 1981). Pollard and Vorhis (1980) published potentiometric maps of the Cretaceous aquifer system in Georgia. Unoublished potentiometric maps pertinent to aquifers comprised of sediments of Late Cretaceous and early Tertiary age in eastern Alabama, Georgia, and western South ' Carolina have been compiled by ongoing Southeastern Coastal Plain RASA investigations. With the exception 4 of the Savannah River area, the potentiometric contour configuration delineated 39
T
~
/ 0 /
0
/
\
' /' s,/
"S A DDL E" PATTERN
- 5 X
/00
. 1 INVERTED "V" PATTERN 40
. . .- .- _. - .. - - - . - - =. . _ . ,
, by each of these maps near large rivers and straans is an inverted "V" pattern, shown in a generalized form in the drawing below. These maps and related notentiometric data suggest that the Al aquifer contour configuration along the Savannah River valley southeast of Augusta is atypical with respect to corresponding patterns pertinent to correlative and lithologically .similar acuifers along other large rivers within and
' roximate p to the study area. Particularly atypical are the narrowing of potentiometric contours near the Savannah River and the resulting rela-tively large lateral potentiometric gradients toward the river northwest of the Millett fault.
The anomaleous Al aquifer potentiometric contour patterns southeast of Augusta may be associated with the suggested fault displacemento near Millett, S.C. The trunca. tion of aquifer sediments by the suggested uplife of Triassic rocks (fig. 3) probably affects both the lateral and vertical flow of ground water through the Al aquifer near and updip of the fault. A steeply-dipping clayey gouge zone in the clastic sediments along the Millett fault plane similar to that observed at the Belair fault zone (Prowell and O'Connor,' 1978) could also influence the lateral and vertical movement of ground water. Similar conditions may also exist along the proposed
~
Statesboro fault but the geologic evidence regarding this fault is very l limited. i' l 41 l
- _-_-,_.,.---..-,a -
f i The potentiometric data shown in figure 6 were reevaluated by the authors to indicate the suggested effects of faulting on lateral ground-j water flow within the study area. The authors' interpretation of the predevelopment Al aquifer potentiometric surface is shown in figure 7. Figure 7.--(Caption on next page) belongs near here. ! l Rather than extend potentiometric contours continuously across the l 1 ! Millett and Statesboro-faults, the contours were offset at both faults. I Displacement of contours across the Statesboro fault was suggested by l' i' pairs of potentiometric data points indicating abrupt lateral dsanges , of potentiometric head ranging from about 25 f t near Fairf ax, S.C. , to ! i about 40 ft near the Savannah River. Although disruption of the potenti- ! ometric surface directly across the Millett fault is not well-defined by point potentiometric data, changes in head of as much as 30 f t are l l implied by the paired data northwest of Millett, S.C. I Given the suggested effects of faulting on ground-water flow, the steepness and possibly the orientation of Al aquifer potentiometric gradients between the Millett and Statesboro faults are somewhat changed from updip areas. In South Carolina, southeast of the Millett fault, potentiometric heads seem to be lowest near the fault and toward the Savannah River (figure 7). Potentiometric gradients near Barnwell are about 1.0 ft/mi to the southwest and toward the river. Near the west-cantral part of Allendale County potentiometric gradients seem to' be l generally to the north and to the northwest, toward the Millett fault and the Savannah River. Although data are incomplete, potentiometric gradients northwest of the Statesboro fault seem to be small and oriented only from the southwest toward the northeast. Potentiometric data between i i 42 i I l l l
i ( i Figure 7.--Map showing inferred predevelopment potentiometric surface of the Al aquifer indicating suggested effects of faulting on ground-water flow,' based on 1945-81 water-level data, ' s b h. 43
)
g tg 4 a
+ .
Fairf ax, S.C., and the Savannah River are not available, however, and gradf ant.s may, alternatively be oriented toward the Savannah River in
?
4 l .;~~ , %' , >3 South Carolina as well as in Georgia. Potentiometric gradients southeast of the Statesboro fault seem to be small and generally oriented only
, e , -
toward the Save.nah River. o. A2 Aquifer The inferred predevelopment potentiometric surface of the A2 aquifer shown in figure 8 is contoured without regard to effects of faulting on ground-water flow. Regional potentiometric symmetry and subdued topo-graphic expression Nre also common to this surface and characterize the potentiometric surfaces of both the Al and A2 aquifers (figs. 6 to 9). Undip ;of-the Millett fault in Georgia, potentiometric heads range in
+ e
'altitud4"from about 400 ft in the most updip areas to about 100 f t near the Savannah River. Corresponding values in South Carolina range in altf tude from about 300 f t to 100 f t. Compared to the Al aquifer, A2 aquifer potentiometric gradients seem to be somewhat lower updip of the Millett fault and greater within the wedge of sediments between the y.
Millett.and .etatesboro faults. The A2 acuifer potentiometric surface within this wedge is characterized by a subdued expression of topography t and by pronounced regional symmetry axial to the Savannah River, which sharply contrasts with the corresponding Al aquifer surface. 4 k
' Figure 8.-(Caption on next page) belong near here.
t i
/ 44 e
t' a
4 Figure 8.--Inferred predevelopment potentiometric surface of the A2 aquifer disregarding the effects of faulting on ground-water flow, based on 1945-81 water-level data. e N 45
l 1 l l The authors consider ground-water flow through the A2 aquifer to also be affected by f aulting, although to a lesser degree than corre-sponding flow through the Al aquifer. The author 1' interpretation of the inferred predevelopment potentiometric surface of the A2 aquifer indicating suggested effects of faulting on ground-water flow is shown ' in figure 9. i Figure 9.--(Caption on next page) belongs near here. Abrupt changes in potentiometric head ranging from about 20 to 30 f t are indicated across the Millett fault near Perkins, Ca. , and in South Carolina near the Savannah River. Corresponding changes across the Statesboro fault are about 50 ft near Statesboro, Ga. The drop in \- l A2 aquifer potentiometric head across the Statesboro fault between l Statesboro and Brooklet in Bulloch County, Ga., supplements and reinforces the corresponding Al aquifer potentiometric data, which originally led to the suggestion of this fault. Hydraulie dif ferentiation between the Al nd A2 aquifers is caused, i to a large degree, by the confining characteristics of the carbonaceous l clay of Paleocene age designated previously as C1. In updip areas, Cl is l discontinuous or nonexistent and, depending on local confinement, A2 aquifer potentiometric heads may be similar to or greater than Al aquifer heads. l Hydraulic differentiation between the aquifers generally increases downdip with the occurrence and increasing areal extent of C1 and is t l probably greatest near the Savannah River and other large streams. l l 46 o
A 4 ) Figure 9.-Inferred predevelopment potentiometric surface of the A2 aquifer indicating suggested effects of faulting on ground-water flow, based on 1945-81 water-level data, t 47 l l l
- i. - - -
North of Midville in southwest Murke County, Ga. , observed potentiometric J heads in adjacent wells screened individually in the Al and A2 aquifers are - offset 11 ft in altitude, with the Al acuifer head being greater. In east-central Burke County, Ga., at the site of Plant Vogtle near TW-1 (fig. 2), Al aquifer potentiometric heads are about 170 f t in altitude and A2 aquifer heads range from about 80 to 120 f t. Within the central part of the SRP southeast of Jackson in Aiken County, S.C., A2 aquifer potentiometric heads seem to be similar to or slightly less than Al aquifer heads. Similar relations generally occur to-the southeast, across the central
. part of the SRP to near the Millett fault.
Generally southeast of the SRP, sediments of the A2 aquifer and overlying sediments of late Eocen'e aktd younger age are comprised largely of limestone and sandy limestone. Such lithologies facilitate the vertical movement of ground water and direct or nearly direct hydraulic continuity exists between the A2 aquifer and ground water within overlying sediments. Consequently, surface recharge to the A2 aquifer is direct or nearly direct in interstream areas and A2 aquifer potentiometric heads in these areas may be greater than corresponding Al aquifer heads. Relatively high A2 aquifer heads at the SRP, near Sardis in southeast Murke County, Ga. , and near Swainsboro in Emanuel County, Ga. , may be the result of inter-stream surface recharge to the A2 aquifer. Generally south of the Millett f ault in South Carolina and the Statesboro f ault in Georgia, reversal of vertical potentiometric gradients seems to be everywhere comolete and hydraulic differentiation between the ; l aquifers is pronounced. At Statesboro in Bulloch County, Ga. , measure-ments at various depths in a single test well indicate that potentiometric. 48
heads in the Al and A2 aquifers 'are at altitudes of 201 f t and 117 f t, respectively. Similar measurements at AL-27 (fig. 2) near Martin in Allendale County, S.C., indicate corresponding altitudes of 171 ft and 133 ft. At Savannah, predevelopment head differentials between the Al and A2 aquifers probably were about 100 f t. t 49
Ground-Water Flow ' Lateral Flow
,The directions of lateral flow within aquifers are indicated by their respective potentiometric maps (figs. 7 and 9). Lateral flow within the Al and A2 aquifers northwest of the Millett fault is down gradient from interstream areas of recharge (fig. 2) toward large streams and rivers. In Georgia, Brier Creek and the Ogeechee and Savannah Rivers are shown to be major regional flow boundaries, receiving water directly from both aquifers in updip areas and indirectly by leakance through overlying sediments where the aquifers are deeply buried. Similar flow conditions exist in South Carolina with respect to Upper Three Runs Creek and the Savannah River. The Al aquifer discharges directly into Horse Creek and Hollow Creek in Aiken County, S.C. Lateral flow in the vicinity of the Savannah River is generally directly toward the river in both aquifers. The Al aquifer potentiometric configuration northwest of the Millett fault, particularly the narrowing of contours near the Savannah River, has been previously described as a possible manifestation of faulting.
The potentiometric gradients suggested by these contours and the Al aquifer transmissivities described previously (fig. 5) indicate that lateral flow through the Al aquifer toward the Savannah River between Augusta and the Millett fault is orobably relatively large. Although a significant component of lateral ground-water flow through the Al aquifer near and northwest of the Millett fault is somewhat parallel to the fault, there is also a smaller component of lateral flow generally 4 toward or agains t the strike of the fault. As indicated in figure 3, 50 g s . - - , . m -
--.,.----,.w , . , - . , .- -,--._,-.. - - . -----4 ,
the downdiv continuity of sediments within the. Al aquifer has been dis-
, rupted at the Millett fault such that thick sections of' aquifer sediments are juxtaposed directly against relatively impermeable Triassic rocks.
Thus, lateral flow toward the fault must move vertically upward through C1 into the A2 aquifer, or flow into the restricted part of the Al aquifer southeast of the Millett f ault. In the vicinity of the Savannah River, about 60 percent of total Al aquifer thickness is truncated at the Millett fault (fig. 3) and lateral flow that would otherwise move as underflow down the potentiometric gradient must move vertically upward. In addition, the Savannah River is a potentiometric sink and ground-water movement toward the fault is increasingly vertical with proximity to the rive r. Thus, significant vertical as well as lateral flow components probably occur within the Al aquifer northwest of the Millett fault near. the Savannah River. As a result, any large-scale lateral transfer of ground water within the Al aquifer from the northwest to the southeast across the Millett f ault probably occurs largely in this area. Consider that the transmissivity of the Al aquifer is significantly l and immediately reduced downdip of the Millett fault (fig. 5). A complete lateral transfer of water across the fault (no vertical discharge through ', C1), therefore, would require a large increase in potentiometric gradient near the fault and for some distance downdip. The Al aquifer potentio-metric gradients seem to increase significantly across the fault in South Carolina in the vicinity of the Savannah River; however, this l l 51 l
i
' increase is local and generally reverses downdio. In addition, Al aquifer potentiometric gradients within the wedge of sediments between the Millett
- and Statesboro faults were described previously as very small and trending north to northwest in the west-central part of Allendale County, directly l
opposite to the direction expected if ground water was moving laterally across the f ault from the northwest. Thus, large quantities of lateral flow are probably not transferred across the Millett fault, near the Savannah River. Rather, most ground water within the Al aquifer approaching this fault is probably discharged vertically through C1 into the A2 aquifer and, to some degree, into the Savannah River. Prowell and O'Connor (1978) oh=arved 10-inch wide gouge zones in unit UK2 at the _ Belair fault (fig. 3).- The likelihood that a similar gouge zone of low lateral hydraulic conductivity has formed at the Millett fault restricting I lateral ground-water flow, furchae raia'are==_ the argument'that lateral flow through the Al aquifer across the Millett fault is minimal. The disruption and truncation of aquifer sediments and the probable occurrence of gouge at the Millett fault indicate that ground-water flow
- ! w ,
through the Al aquifer within 'che wedge of sediments between the Millett and Statesboro f aults i_s probably hydraulically discontinuous from flow
, within contemporaneous sediments undip. Thus recharge to the Al aquifer within this wedge probably occurs largely at the northeast and southwest t
52 N - _ _ - - - -
extremities of the Millett fault .and at the southwest extremity of the ^ Statesboro-fault. The sediments that comprise the A2 aquifer- are offset only slightly at the Millett fault relative to the Al aquifer (fig. 3) and the hydraulic effects of this offset are consequently probably less severe. Most flow 1 within the A2 aquifer near the fault probably continues laterally across j the fault, with some degree of interruption caused by fault ronne and the juxtaposition of offset limestones, sands, and clays. nb eL h Within the wedge of sediments between the Millett and Statesboro faults, lateral flow through the A2 aquifer seems to be largely toward
- 4 Brier Creek and the Ogeschee and Savannah Rivers in Georgia and toward the Savannah and Salkehatchie Rivers in South Carolina.
Vertical Flow Vertical flow conditions within and between the Al and A2 aquifers
. in the vicinity of the Millett fault have been described. Where faulting does not significantly disrupt ground-water flow, the potential for k1*p* p 4 vertical leakance between aquifers is largely dependent on sediment
. v' " .g
[ lithology and the direction and size of the vertical potentiometric ggf , W rradient. Thus, -within mos t of the study area vertical potentiometric i differentiation suggests that some water is transferred vertically upward _ 1 from the Al aquifer, through C1, and into the A2 aquifer. Such transfers
- j. are probably relatively large in the vicinity of potentiometric sinks,
=
oarticularly near the Savannah River northwest of the Millett fault. f s 53
t Similarly, within updip parts of the study area, some ground water orobah1v is transferred vertically downward from the A2 aquifer, across or around local confining zones, and into the Al aquifer. The replica relation of each aquifer to topography has been described previously and also implies some degree of continuity of vertical flow. Data describing vertical hydraulic differentiation within the Al aquifer are available at several sites within the SRP and at AL-27 near
. Martin in northeastern Allendale County, S.C. Christi (1964) reported I- potentiometric heads in observation wells at the SRP where three clusters of three wells each are individually screened across a 10-foot section of
- , sediments near the bottom, center, and top of the Al aquifer. Differences in potentiometric head between the hottom and top of _ the aquifer (about 6'00 f t) were less than 3' f t in each cluster, indicating only a slight
, vertical hydraulic gradient within the aquifer. Similarly, at AL-27 (fig. 2) potentiometric heads changed only about 4 ft across the lower two-thirds of total Al aquifer thickness (about 200 f t). Thus, flow through I the Al aquifer seems to be predominantly lateral at the two sites where definitive data are available. Whether these data are regionally repre-l', sentative presently cannot be determined. Vertical hydraulic gradients
. within the Al aquifer near the Savannah River and other large streams updip of the Millett fault probably trend uovard and probably are rela-tively large.
54 i
.-_ . , _ _ - . , _ _ _ _ . - - - ~. _-.:_.. - - , - . . ~ . - - - . , . - _ - - - , . - - -
o - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
4 Data describing vertical hydraulic gradients within the A2 aquifer , -are not available. Vertical flow, however, probably is insignificant within the study area except near regional flow boundaries such as Brier Creek or the Savannah River. This concept is reinforced by a large suite of potentiometric data for Screven County, Ga. , which indicates nearly direct hydraulic continuity between the limestones of the A2 aquifer and overlying limestones of late Eocene age. Data reported by Warren (L945) indicate similar continuity near Savannah in Chatham County, Ca. Based on data from observation and pumping wells located near Four-i mile Branch and the Aiken-Barnwell Co. line, Siple (1967) reported the j possibility of downward varefemi leakance from the A2 aquifer in response to nearby long-term pumping from the Al aquifer. Mayer (1972) reported i little or no leakance between the ' aquifers as a result of long-term aquifer tests near Snelling in Barnwell County, S.C. Aquifer Discharge to the Savannah River The Savannah River has previously been described as a regional 1 potentiometric sink for both the Al and A2 aquifers. The atypical Al l
.J _ aquifer potentiometric contour configuration near the Savannah River northwest of the Millett fault and the resulting, relatively large 4
lateral flow toward the river have been described previously as a possible manifestation of faulting. The truncation cf Al aquifer sediments by the Millett fault at the Savannah River and the probable vertical upward transfer of ground water from the Al aquifer to overlying j A2 aquifer sediments have also been described. Northwest of the Millett
. 55 4
_ - - . - - - . -,,,-.- ,,__ _.m__._..__.__v - ~ - - - _ - , - , - _ . _ _
f ault the A2 aquifer is in direct hydraulic continuity with the Savannah River. Consequently, lateral flow from the Al aquifer toward the Savannah
, River combined with vertical upward discharge from the Al aquifer near the Millett fault and the river could contribute anomalously large I
quantities of ground water to river discharge upstream of the Millett fault. The Ogeschee River, Brier Creek, and the South Fobk of the Edisto River are also potentiometric sinks relative to both aquifers. Contemporaneous gaging-station data have been routinely collected on the Savannah River at Augusta, Ga. (station 02197000), at Burtons Ferry Bridge, Ga. (station 02197500), and near Clyo, Ga. (station 02198500). Corresponding data were collected on Brier Creek near Thompson, Ga. (station 02197520), and at M111 haven, Ga. (station 02198000). Ogeechee River stations of interest to this study are nese Louisville, Ga. (station 02200500), at Scarboro, Ga. (station 02202000), and near Eden, Ga. (station 02202500). Data from gaging stations on the South Fork of the Edisto River near Montmorenci, S.C. (02172500) and near Denmark, S.C. ,. (02173000) were also utilized (fig. 2). Table 2 lists 30-day, 2-year (30-day 02 ) low flows for each station during the indicated period of record. Although the 30-day minimum flow probably does not occur simultaneously at each of the s'tations of interest,
. differences in streamflow between the stations are considered indicative of average, predevelopment rates of aquifer discharge to the given reach.
56 a
-+w' y -% - . , - _ - , sm.,-w-. ms.,-w.y+ wm %., w .-. m, - -.gm,.yg,wm.-_e ,,,,4-qy-----,,-- , - _ ,,.m -. .%,m- 9 y g,# yy -e--y- -,m9--, ,,
Baseflow is computed as aquifer discharge oer square mile of drainage area. Baseflow to Brier Creek and between the two most upstream stations on the Savannah, Ogeechee, and South Fork of the Edisto Rivers is largely contributed from drainage undip of the Millett fault. Aquifer discharge is contributed to the Savannah River between Augusta and Burtons Ferry Bridge at the rate of 0.74 (f 3t /s)/mi2, which exceeds by a factor of 4 the corresponding discharge to the Ogeechee River between Louisville and Scarboro and exceeds by a factor of 1.6 and 2.0 the corresponding discharges to the South Fork of the Edisto River and to Brier Creek. Within their defined reaches, each of the streams I receive discharge from contemporaneous sediments of similar lithologies. The Savannah and Ogeechee Rivers receive discharge from about the same incremental drainage areas (1,200 mi 2). Although the Savannah River is slightly more incised into Coastal Plain sediments than the other streams listed in table 2, differences in incisement are probably not I significant where discharge to the river occurs from deeply buried aquifers. Thus, aquifer discharge to major rivers and streams within the study area contributed largely updip of the Millett fault from ! contemporaneous and lithologically similar sediments is shown to increase I both eastward and westward to a maximum at the Savannah River. 4 57
- , - - - y . , . , ,- , , ,-- --,_ _- , , . , , _ _ . . . _ . - _ - , _ _ . _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . .
Table 2.--Thirty-day , 2-year low flows at selected stations dn the Savannah River, Brier Creek, and Ogeechee River, Ga. , and the South Fork of the Rdisto River, S.C. U.S. Geological Drainage Period Survey Station name area of 30-day 02 Baseflow Station No. (mi2 ) record (ft 3/s) * ((f t3 /s)/mi2) 02197000 Savannah River at Augusta, Ga. 7,508 1960-70 6,300 0.74 02197500 Savannah River at Burtons Ferry Bridge, Ga. 8,650 1960-70 7,150
.33 0198500 Savannah River near Clyo, Ga. 9,850 1960-70 7,540 02197520 Brier Creek near Thomson, Ga. 55 1970-80 2.35 -
.37 02198000 Brier Creek at M111 haven, Ga. 646 1960-70 260 1970-80 220 02200500 Ogeechee River near Louisville , Ga. '800 11937-49 170
, .17 02202000 Ogeechee River at Scarboro, Ga. 1,940 1937-71 360 02202500 Ogeechee River .11 near Eden, Ga. 2,650 1938-74 440 02172500 South fork of Edisto River near Montmorenci, S.C. 198 1939-65 117
.46 02173000 South fork of the Edisto River near Denmark, S.C. 720 1931-65 358 1 Adjuste'd to 1937-71, see Carter and Putnam (1978).
58
Aquifer discharge to the Savannah River downstream between Burtona Ferry Bridge and Clyo occurs at the rate of 0.33 (f t3/s)/mi2 or about 45 percent of the baseflow contributed between Augusta and Burtons Ferry Bridge. Baseflow to the corresponding reach of the Ogeechee River between Scarboro and Eden is 0.11 (ft3/s)/m12 and amounts to about 65 percent of the flow contributed between Louisville and Scarboro. More than half the f1'ow contributed to the Savannah River between Burtons Ferry Bridge
^
and Clyo is contributed by Brier Creek (table 2) and is derived largely from sediments updip of the Millett f ault (fig. 3). Baseflow to the lower reach of the Savannah River without the contribution from Brier Creek is 0.23 (f t3 /,)/,1, 2about twice the rate of baseflow contributed to the comparable reach of the Ogeechee River and only 32 percent of the baseflow contributed to the Savannah River between Augusta and Burtons Fe rry B rid ge. Thus, downstream trends of baseflow contributed along similar reaches of the Savannah and Ogeechee Rivers indicate that anoma-lously large aquifer discharges to the Savannah River occur Renerally upstream of t'e Millett fault. Similar east-west trends were discussed previously. Thus both east-west and downstream trends indicate anoma-lously high aquifer discharges to the Savannah River upstream of the Millett fault. Such discharges are possibly an. indirect manifestation of the lateral truncation of aquifer sediments by the Millett fault (fig. 3) and the resulting atypical ground-water flow patterns northwest of the fault as well as the suggested vertical movement of ground water updio of the fault near the Savannah River. 59
SUMMARY
AND CONCLUSIONS Structural, 11thologic, and hydraulic data strongly indicate faulting of Coastal Plain sediments near Millett in Allendale, County, S.C. Analysis of cuttings from boreholes immediately updip and downdip of the fault indicate that Upper Cretaceous and lower Tertiary sedimentary contacts show increasing displacement with increasing depth. Vertical offsets range from about 700 f t at the base of Upper Cretaceous sediments to about 20 ft in beds of late Eocene age. In addition, the Upper Cretaceous Middendorf Formation which comprises the basal 500 f t of Coastal Plain sediments on the downblock side of the fault seems to be entirely missing on the adjacent upblock. -t 4 1 4 60
Mydraulic discontinuities across the Millett fault include abrupt _
~
large reductions in aquifer transmissivity and local decreases in potentiometric head. Transmissivity 'of the basal Coastal Plain aquifer is reduced about 75 percent across the fault, largely due to changes in sediment lithology and large reductions in aquifer thickness. Linearly aligned potentiometric anomalies beteen Statesboro, Ga. , and Brunson, S.C. , and the unusual thickness of Coastal Plain sediments in southern Screven County, Ga. , are evidence of the suggested Statesboro fault. Ground-water flow within the basal Coastal Plain aquifer between the Millett and Statesboro faults is probably largely hydraulically discon-tinuous from contemporaneous sediments updip. Ground-water flow southeast of the Millett fault, is largely toward the Savannah River and to the north and northwest. Near the Statesboro fault, potentiometric gradients are small but flow seems to be from the southwest in Georgia toward the northeast to South Carolina. Lateral ground-water flow within the hasal Coastal Plain aquifer is largely disrupted at the Millett fault because of the juxtacosition of hundreds of feet of aquifer sediments against relatively impermeable Triassic rocks. Thus vertical flow probably occurs within the basal Coastal Plain aauifer updip of the fault, espe-cially near the Savannah River and may contribute to the anomalously large quantities of baseflow noted in the Savannah River between Augusta, i Ca., and Burtons Ferry Bridge, Ga. l l l i 61
SELECTED REFERENCES Armour and Cape, Inc.,1980, Well monitoring plan, airport well field, Richmond County, Georgia: Unpublished report prepared for Richmond County Water and Sewer System, Augusta, Georgia,14 p.: Report on file at U.S. Geological Survey, Doraville, Georgia 30360. Bechtel Corporation,1972, Applicants environmental report, volumes I and II - Alvin W. Vogtle Nuclear Plant: Unpublished report for Georgia Power Company, Atlanta, Georgia: Report on file at U.S. Geological Survey, Doraville, Georgia 30360. 1973, Preliminary safety analysis report, volumes II and III - Alvin W. Vogtle Nuclear Plant: Unpublished report for Georgia Power Company, Atlanta, Georgia: Report on file at U.S. Geological Survey, Doraville, Georgia 30360. Behrendt, J. C. , Hamilton, R. M. , Acke rmann, R. D. , and Henry, V. J. , 1981, Cenozoic faulting in the vicinity of the Charleston, South Carolina, 1886 earthquake: Geology, v. 9, p. 117-122. Buie, R. F.,1978, The Huber Formation of eastern central Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 93, p.1-7. Carter, R. F. , and Putnam, S. A. ,1978, Low-flow frequency of Georgia streams: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations 77-127, 104 p. l Cederstron, D. J. , Boswell, E. H. , and Tarver, G. R. ,1979, Summary apprais-als of the Nation's ground-water resources--South Atlantic-Gulf . region: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 813-0, 35 p. i 62 l l
SELECTED REFERFNCES--Continuel Christi, R. J., 1964, Storage of radioactive wastes in basement rock beneath the Savannah River Plant: E. I. duPont de Nemvurs and Company Report DP-844, 105 p. Cook, F. A. , Albeugh, D. S. , Brown, L. D. , Kaufman, S. , Oliver, J. E. , and Hatcher, R. D., Jr., 1979, Thin-skinned tectonics in the crystalline southern Appalachians; C0 CORP seismic-reflection profiling of the Blue Ridge and Piedmont: Geology, v. 7, p. 563-567. Cook, F. A. , Brown, L. D. , Kaufman, S. , Oliver, J. E. , and Peterson, T. A. , 1981, C0 CORP seismic profiling of the Appalachian Orogen beneath the Coastal Plain of Georgia (in press). Cooke, C. W., 1936, Geology of the Coastal Plain of South Carolina: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 867, 196 p. . Cramer, H. R. , and Arden, D. D. ,1980, Subsurface Cretaceous and Paleocene Geology of the Coastal Plain of Georgia: Georgia Department of Natural Resources Open-File Report 80-8, 184 p. Crickmay, C. W., 1952, Geology of the crystalline rocks of Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 58, 54 p.- Daniels, D. L.,1974, Geologic interpretation of geophysical maps, central Savannah River area, South Carolina and Georgia: U.S.~ Geological Survey Geophysical Investigations Map GP-893. Gelbaum, C. ,1978, The geology and ground water of the Gulf Trough: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 93, p. 38-48. Georgia Department of Natural Resources,1976, Geologic map of Georgia. 63
SELECTED REFERENCES--Continued Hack, J. T.,1979, Rock control and tectenism--their importance in shaping the Appalachian Highlands: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 78-403, 38 p. Hasel, J. E. , Bybell, L. M. , Christopher, R. A. , Fredericksen, N. O. , May, F. E. , McLean, D. M. , Poore, R. Z. , Smith, C. C. , Sohl, N. F. , Valentine, P. C. , .and Witmer, R. J. ,1977, Bios tratigraphy of the deep corehole (Clubhouse Crossroads Corehole) near Charleston, South Carolina in Rankin, D. F. , ed. , Studies related to the Charleston, South Carolina, earthquake of 1886--A preliminary report: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1028, p. 71-89. Heron, S. D. ,1959, A small basement cored anticlinal warp in the basal Cretaceous sediments near Cheraw, South Carolina: Geologic Notes, Division of Geolorv, State Development Board, v. 3, no. 4, p.1-5. Herrick, S. M., and Counts, F. B.,1968, Late Tertiary stratigraphy of eastern Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Guidebook for Third Annual Field rip, 88 p. Herrick, S. M. and Vorhin, R. C.,1963, Subsurface geology of the Georgia l Coastal Plain: Georgia Geologic Survey Information Circular 25, 80 p. I Huddleston, P. F. , and Retrick, J. H. ,1979, The stratigraphy of the Barn-well Group of Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Open-File Reoort 80-1, 89 p. J. E. Sirrine Company, 1980, Groundwater Resource Study, Sirrine Job. No. P-1550, DCN-001: Unpublished report for Kimberly-Clark Corporationt J. E. Sirrine Company, Greenville, South Carolina, 26 p.: Reoort on file at U.S. Geological Survey, Doraville, Georgia 30360. 64
l l l i SELECTED REFERENCES-H ontinued i l Johnston, R. H. , Healy, H.G. , and Hayes, L. R. ,1981, Potentiometric surf ace of the Tertiary Linestone aquifer system, southeastern United States, May 1980: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 81-486. Johns ton, R. H. , Krause, R. E. , Meye r, F. W. , Ryder, P. D. , Tibbsis , C. H. , and Runn, J. D. ,1980, Estimated potentiometric surface for the Ter-tiary Limestone aquifer system, southeastern United States, prior to development: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 80-406. LeGrand, H. E. , and Furcron, A. S. ,1956, Geology and ground-water resources of central-east Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 64,174 p. LeGrand, H. E. , and Pettyjohn, W. A. ,1981, Regional hydrogeological con-cepts of homoclinal flanks: Groundwater, v. 19, no. 3, p. 303-310. Marine, I. W. ,1973, Geohydrology of the buried Triassic Basin at the Savannah River Plant: Presented at the International Symposium on Underground Waste Management and Artificial Recharge at New Orleans, Louisiana, September 26-30, 1973, 20 p. _1979, Hydrology of buried crystalline rocks at the Savannah River Plant near Aikan, South Carolina: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 79-1544, 160 p. 1 Marine, I. W., and Root, R. W. , Jr. ,1976, Summary of hydraulic conductivity tests in the SRP separation area: Savannah River Laboratory Environ-mental Transport and Effects Research Annual Report DP-1412, p. 21-1 to 21-4 _,___1978, Geohydrology of deposits of Claiborne age at the Savannah River Plant: Savannah River Laboratory Environmental Transport and Effects Research Annual Report DP-1489, p. 57-60.. 65
SELECTED REFERENCES--Continued Marine, I.' W. , and Routt, K. R. ,1975", A ground-water model of the Tusca-loosa aquifer at the Savannah River Plant: Savannah River Laboratory Environmental Transport and Effects Research Annual Report, DP-1374,
- p. 14-1 to 14-10.
Marine, I. W., and Siple, G. E. ,1974, Buried Triassic Basin in the central Savannah River area, South Carolina and Georgia: Geological Survey of America Bulletin, v. 85, p. 311-320. Mayer, L. , Prowell, D. C. , and Reinhardt, J. ,1977, The subenvelope map as a tool for delineating linear features in the Georgia Piedmont and Coas-tal Plain: 11.5. Geological Survey Open File-Report 77-695, 19 p.
- Mayer, P. G. ,1972, Impact of BNFP's pumpage from the Tuscaloosa aquifer on the ground-water table: Unpublished report No. EMP-104, prepared for Allied-Gulf Nuclear Services,111 p.: Report on file at U.S. Geologi-cal Survey, Doraville, Georgia 3n360.
Mitchell, G. D.,1981, Hydrogeologic data of the Dougherty Plain and adjacent areas, southwest Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Information Circular 58, 124 p. P'e tty, A. J. , Petrafesco, F. A. , and Moore, F. C. , Jr. ,1965, Aeromagnetic map of the Savannah River Plant area, South Carolina and Georgia: U.S. Geological Survey Geophysical Investigations Map GP-489. Pollard, L. D. , and Vorhis, R. C. ,1980, The geohydrology of the Cretaceous aquifer system in Georgia: Georgia Department of Natural Resources Hydrologic Atlas 3. I 1 3 66 I
SELECTED RFJERENCES--Continued Prowell, D. C. ,1981, Index of faults of Cretaceous and Cenozoic age in the eastern United States: U.S. Geological Survey MF Map 1269 (in press). Prowell, D. C. , and O'Connor, B. J. ,1978, Belair f ault zones: Evidence of Tertiary fault displacement in eastern Georgia: Geology, v. 6, p. 681-684. Rankin, D. F. , ed. ,1977, Studies related to the Charleston, South Carolina, earthquake of 1886--A preliminary report: U.S. Geological Survey Pro-fessional Paper 1028, 204 p. Root, R. W., Jr. ,1977, Results of pumping tests in shallow sediments in the separations area: Savannah River Laboratory Environmental Transport and Effects Research Annual Report DP-1455, p. 55-58. 1979, Subsurface hydrology of Coastal Plain sediments in the SRP sepa-rations area: Savannah River Laboratory Environmental Transport and Ef fects Annual Report DP-1526, p. 207-212. Root , R. W. , Jr. , and Marine, I. W. , 1977, A conceptual geohydrological model of the separations area: Savannah River Laboratory Environmental Transport and Effects Research Annual Report DP-1455, p. 63-68. 1978, Water-level fluctuations in Coastal Plain sediments at SRP: Savannah River Laboratory Environmental Transport and Effects Research Annual Report DP-1489, p. 65-68. Sandy, J. , Carver, R. F. , and Crawford, T. J. ,1966, S tratigraphy and econo-mic geology of the coastal plain of the central Savannah River area, Georgia: Geological Society of America, Southeastern Section Guide-4 book, Field Trip 3, 25 p. 67 J
. - _ , -c., .--..-,_,_mr,-,. ,,-,__-_-_v. y ,, - _ . , _ . , _ , -m.._ _ _ _ , . . ,,.-,...-,....__,_,___y_. - , _ . _ _ _ , _ , . _ , _ _ _ . , _ _
9 SELECTED REFERENCES--Continued Scrudato, R. J. ,1969, Kaolin and associated sediments of east-central Georgia: 17niversity of North Carolina Ph.D. Thesis, 97 p. Siple, C. E. ,1946, Ground-water investigations in South Carolina: South Carolina Research, Planning, and Development Board Bulletin 15,116 p. 1955, Geology and ground water in parts of Aiken, Barnwell, and Allendale Counties, South Carolina: Unpublished Report prepared by the U.S. Geological Survey for the Savannah River Operations Office of the Atomic Energy Commission,183 p.: Report on file at U.S. Geological Survey, Doraville, Georgia 30360. 1960, Piesometric levels in the Cretaceous sand aquifer of the Savannah River basin: Georgia Mineral Newsletter, v.13, no. 4, p.163-166,. 1967, G~eology and ground water of the Savannah River Plant and vicinity, South Carolina: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 1841, 113 p. 1975, Ground-water resources of Orangeburg County, South Carolina: South Carolina State Development Board, Division of Geology Bulletin 36, 59 p. Smith, G. W., III,1979, Stratigraphy of the Aiken County Coastal Plain, South Carolina: South Carolina Geological Survey Open-File Report 19, 34 p. 1980, Preliminary report on the geology of Lexington County, South Carolina: ' South Carolina Geological Survey Open-File Report 20, 45 p. Snipes, D. S. ,1965 Stratigraphy and sedimentation of the Middendorf Formation between Lynches River, South Carolina and the Ocmulgee River, t Georgia: University of North Carolina Ph.D. Thesis,140 p. 68
SELECTED REFERENCES--Continued Stallings, J. S.,1967, South Carolina streamflow characteristics, low-flow frequency and flow duration: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report, 83 p. Tschudy, R. H. , and Paterson, S. H. ,1975, Palynological evidence for Late Cretaceous, Paleocene, and Early Middle Eocene ages for strata in the kaolin belt, central Georgia: U.S. Geological Survey Journal of Research, v. 3, no. 4, p. 437-445.
- U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Savannah District, 1956, Fort Gordon water-supply study: Unpublished report authorized by Directive No. 2, Fort Cordon MCA-AdvP, 9 p.: Report on file at U.S. Geological Survey, Doraville, Georgia 30360.
1967, Kaolin investigation, Fort Gordon, Georgia: Unpublished Report, , 5 p.: Report on file at U.S. Geological Survey, Doraville, Georgia 30360. W. G. Keck and Associates, Inc. ,1965, Aquifer test analyses--Gracewogd well
#1 and Richmond County well #8: Unpublished Report prepared for Rich-mond County Water and Sewerage System, Augusta, Georgia, 10 p.: Report on file at U.S. Geological Survey, Doraville, Georgia 30360.
Warren, M. A. ,1945, Artesian water in southeastern Georgia: Georgia Geo-logic Survey Bulletin 49-A, 83 p. Wentworth, C. M. , and Mergner-Keefer, M. ,1981, Regenerate faults of small Cenozoic offset as probable earthquake sources in the southeastern United States: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 81-356, 52 p. , 69
SELECIED REFERENCES--Continued Winker, C. D., and Howard, J. D., 1977, Correlation of.tectoutcally deformed shorelines on.the southern Atlantic Coastal Plain: Geology, v. 5,
- p. 123-127.
t Zimmerman, E. A. ,1977, Ground-water resources of Colquitt County, Georgia: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 77-56, 41 p. Zohack, M. D. , Healy, J. H. , Roller, J. C. , Cohn, C. S. , and Higgins , B. M. , - 1978, Normal faulting and in situ stress in the South Carolina Coastal Plain r. ear Charleston: Geology, v. 6, p. 147-152. O i I 70 4
. , . . - -.- _ _ _ _ . - - - . _ _ . , , . _ . _ ,,-_y -. . . . _ . . . . - - _ . . . .. . - _ , . . . , , , , . , . - _ . . - . _ _ . . . . - . . _ . _ . . . . - , ,-- .---.-e_--_
SUPPL' EMF.NTAL INFORMATION Map Location of Well-Dats Points Potentiometric. lithologic, and structural data described in this report pertain almost exclusively to well-data points. Locaticn of well-data points in Georgia and Sout'h Carolina utilized original source material, when availale, from which described locations were transferred to 7 1/2-minute or 15-minute toporraphic maps. Such material, for
' Georgia, consisted largely of well-location maps and well schedules and a drawn and(or) written description of the well location. Wells listed by LeGrand and Fureron (1956) were located using a published well-p -location map in combination with well-schedule data. A large number of well locations for Georgia were transferred directly from corresponding ,3 locations shown on county road maps, topographic maps, and municipal street maps. Well-location maps printed in consultants' reports were utilized extensively in Richmond and Burke Counties. To some degree'the accuracy of well l'ocations in Georgia is dependent upon when the well was drilled. The locations of most wells drilled during 1960-81 are known with a high degree of accuracy, and data pertinent to these wells comprise the majority of the data base. The locations of many of the wells listed by LeGrand and Fureron (1956) are known less accurately.
Field ~ checks of a representative sample of such wells have indicated, however, that location transfers from the published map and well schedules to quadrangle maps were generally accurate. l 71 1 l _
a t 4 The transfer of well-location data to quadrangle maps for South Carolina largely paralleled corresponding af forts for Georgia. The accuracy of well locations in South Carolina, based on U.S. Geological S.2rvey file data, is compromised to a large degree because of the nearly
, total lack of suitable well-location maps. Consequently, written location
- ~ , descriptions and Army Map Service coordinates listed on well schedules
+
were utilized conjunctively to locate a large number of wells in Aiken, Barnwell,'and Allendale Counties. Army Map Service coordinates and given land-surf ace altitudes were utilized almost exclusively to locate the large number of wells within the SRP listed in Siple (1955) that could not be found in U.S. Geological Survey data files. Well-data points in Orangeburg County were located using well schedules and a published 17. I well-location map from Siple (1975). Well-data points in Bamberg and Hampton Counties were located exclusively from well schedules and other pertinent information obtained from U.S. Geological Survey data files. Modern (post-1960) well data pertinent to the SRP are located with a high degree of accuracy based on reported latitudes and longitudes and SRP grid coordinates. The accuracy of well locations in South Carolint is also somewhat dependent upon the period of time a particular well reconnaissance was . conducted. Historical (pre-1960) data are the least accurately located. The lack of well-location maps has been compensated for in this study by carefully applying location descriptions written on well schedules or 72
. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . - ~ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ . _ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _
other original source data to contemporary county maps and modern quad-rangle maps. These efforts in conjunction with Army Map Service coor-dinates, which commonly are listed on original source materials, have provided locations of historical well-data points of sufficient accuracy to be utilized in this or similar studies. If considered doubtful, the locations of critical well-data points were field checked in both Georgia and South Carolina, wherever and whenever possible. I
+
73}}