ML20127B651
Text
_
May 11,1984 HEMORANDUM FOR: Jesse L. Funches, Director Planning and Program Analysis Staff FROM:
Darrell G. Eisenhut, Director l
Division of Licensing j
SUBJECT:
REVISED PIDS FOR FIN A-6819, " RESOLUTION OF WATERFORD 3 C
QUALITY CONTROL ALLEGATIONS", TO INCREASE THE LEVEL OF j
EFFORT NEEDED FROM THE CONTRACTOR (INEL): DL FIN PLAN
.I CHANGE NUMBER 9 l
j Enclosed are revised Project Identification Summary Sheets (PIDS) for the j
above subject project at Idaho National Engineering Laboratory.
An additional $255K in the Casework Decision Unit needs to be allocated for E
FIN A-6819 because DL does not have these funds available in its approved i
FY84 FIN Plan. These additional funds are' needed to provide a higher level of effort now needed by the Overall Management Coordination for Waterford 3 h
(Mr. D. Crutchfield) than was orginally planned to complete evaluations of i
quality control allegations and of how the applicant has meet NRC requirements
(
in NRC General Inspection Procedures Manual Chapters and selected IE f
5011etins at the plant. These evaluations need to be completed in a timely
?
manner to avoid potential delays in the low power licensing decision for j
Waterford 3.
We request that you provide the above additional funds to FIN A-6819. These funds are needed to provide the higher level of effort in this month, May I
1984.
If you have any questions, please contact Mark Williams on E
extension 28461.
l t.
\\e hr Darrel G. Eisenhut, Director l
Division of Licensing
Enclosure:
DISTRIBUTION SBajua DEisenhut
_/
Revised PIDS for FIN A-6819 Central Files 3filliams DCrutchficidV TAPr;G Files FMiraglia LSolander JDonchew JLeonard a TDiGolna MG DL:TAPM DL:
03 DC i
hew SBajwa IUM.iams D
chfield FMiraglia JLeonard l
'5/$/84 05/r)/84 05/lb/84 05/t)/84 05/tc /84 05/b/84 f
^
q en ut
/A' h
[W,
^
0 l *l4C E,
C
.pa a*%q'g
/*
UNITED STATES
[
j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
- N j
WASHING TON. O. C. 20555
\\
'../ /
May 11,1984 MEMORANDUM FOR: Jesse L. Funches, Director Planning and Program Analysis Staff FRON:
Darrell G. Eisenhut, Director Divisten of Licensing
SUBJECT:
REVISED PIDS FOR FIN A-6819. " RESOLUTION OF WATERFORD 3 QUALITY CONTROL ALLEGATIONS", TO INCREASE THE LEVEL OF EFFORT NEEDED FROM THE CONTRACTOR (INEL): DL FIN PLAN CHANGE NUMBER 9 Enclosed are revised Project Identification Sumary Sheets (PIDS) for the' above subject project at Idaho National Engineering Laboratory.
An additional $255K in the Casework Decision Unit needs to be allocated for FIN A-6819 because DL does not have these funds available in its approved FY84 FIN Plan. These additional funds are needed to provide a higher level of effort now needed by the Over,all Management Coordination for Waterford 3 (Mr. D. Crutchfield) than was ouginally planned to complettevaluations of quality control allegations and of how the applicant has meft NRC-requirements in NRC General Inspection Procedures Manual Chapters and selected IE Balletins at the plant. These evaluations need to be completed in a timely manner to avoid potential delays in the low power licensing decision for Waterford 3.
We request that you provide the above additional funds to FIN A-6819. These funds are needed to provide the higher level of effort in this month, ay 1984 If you have any questions, please contact Mark Williams on extension 28461.
I
~
.1 O n
DarrN1 G. Eisenhu#t, Director 4
Division of Licensing
Enclosure:
Revised PIDS for FIN A-6819 I
~
,ttachmen; 1 0FFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION PROJECT. IDENTIFICATION SUP."ARY (PIDS)
{M S 0 @
en
~
May 11,1984 Rev.2 Resolution of Waterford Unit 3 Quality Control Allega' ions FIN: A-6819 t
CONTRACT NUM5ER (Non-DOE):
B&R NUMBER:
NRR OPEPATING PLAN 20-19-40-4)-1 INDEX NO.:
DIVISION:
BRANCH:.
PROJECT MANAGER:-
DL TAPMG Jack Donohew, Jr.
CONTRACTOR: INEL(EG&G)
CONTRACT METHOD: DOE Wo'rk Order CITY, STATE (Non-00E):
SPALL BUSINESS / MINORITY CONTRACT (Non-DDE):
SU"-CONTPACTOR(5): No YES / /
NO /X/
AMOUNT $
PROJECTED PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE START: 4/2/84 END: 6/30/84 PROJECTED FINANCIAL DATA (000'.s)
PROJECT FY ISE.M84 p
TOTAL
'OTAL TOTAL CARRY F MEEX84
.FY FAX 85 FY MS6 YAL -
03LIG COSTED OVER SUDG BUDG BUDG
,2Y O 1
O 0-X3 _
0 0
2 APPLICATION (RELATE THE PROJECT TO A SPECIFIC PLANNED ACCOMPLISHMENT)
NRR FY84 Operation Plan: Casework Decision Unit, Planned Accomplish Power Reactor P,eviews This contract' is provide assistance to NRC in resolving allegations of improper quality control practices during the construction of Waterferd Unit 3 plant. These allegations must be resolved in the near future..to affoid a potential delay in the low power j
licensing decision by NRC for this plant.
This contract is also to provide assistance to NRC to evaluate how the applicant has met NRC requirements in General Inspection Procedures Manual Chapters 2512, 2513 and 2514 b
(selected parts from these Chapters), IE Sulletin 79-14 and the Independent Design Verification Program (IDVP).
h em
WORK REOUIREMENTS (DESCRIBE WHAT IS TO BE PERFORMED)
The contractor will evaluate the alleged improper quality control practice during the construction of Waterford Unit 3, by a review of associated QA/QC documentation and will document his evaluation which will give the signiff-cance of his findings and the generic implications of his findings as they, relate to the facility.
The contractor will provide an interim Technical Evaluation Report (TER) and S final TERs. The interim TER will be an immediate report to be used by the
{2.
NRC Staff to address the alleged improper quality control practices in the low power licensing decision for the plant. The final TER will be provided within four weeks of the interim TER.
Contractor Deliverables FY, Interim TER 1
Final TER SL The contractor will'also evaluate how the applicant has. set NRC requirements in certain giarts of GIPfi Chapters IE Bulletin 79=14 and IDf/P and provide a FINAL TER.
I MODIFICATIONS (DESCRIBE MAJOR CHANGES TO THE PROJECT)
~
Mod. No I: Increase the estimated value of the project from $100K to $232X, The" fncrease is a hi~gher level of effort needed to complete the evaluations of the quality control' allegations at Waterford 3 in a timely manner to advoid potential delays in the low power licensing decision for the plant.
Additio'al increase in the estimated value of the project because a Mod No. 2:
n higher level of effort from the contractor is now estimged to be
~
needed to complete the evaluations in a timely manner. This increases the e' timated value of the project fr~'
$44dk s
Ac.dJ N Tks q eL 4 b<. n g $
p t h Lw COMPLETE AS APPLICABLE -
Recor:nended:
Endorsed:
Endorsed:
Endorsed:
Approved-PDCJCLI MANAGER SEC7 ION ISR BRANCH CHF.
ASST DIR.
DIV.JIR f
n 'A h6M glia at (Initials) nomew nr
/
M 4/ 4-P te,J.
- /rd I/
(Date)
'(
.Y
/ /
/
l
e Dated: tiay 11,1984 ESTDtATED LEVEL OF EFFORT NEEDED FROM C0flTRACTOR FOR EVALUATING WATERFORD 3 QUALITY CONTROL ALLEGATIONS FIN No: A-6819 NRC Project Manager: Jack Donohew Jr. (492-7230)
Estimate No 1:
$100K 7 person team at Waterford site for 3 weeks working 7 days a week i person month at If!EL to write draft / final TER 2 person 3 day; trip trip to Washington to discuss TER Estimate No. 21 5232K 7 person team at Waterford site for 5 weeks working 7 days a week,12 hours1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br /> a day up to 4 visits I person month at INEL to write draft / final TER 1 person 1 week trip to Washington 2 person 3 days trip to Washington to discuss TER Estimate fio. 3:
$407 Project 1: $332K; Quality Control Allegations 7 person team at Waterford site for 6.6 weeks working 7 days a, week, 12 hours1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br /> a day up to 4 visits 2 person team at Waterford site for 17 person-days working 12 hours1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br /> a day one visit 1 person month at IflEL to write draft / final TER 1 person 1 week trip to Washington 2 person 3 days trip to Washington to discuss TER Project 2: See next page The estimated costs include travel, per diem at site, rental cars a h site and salaries with overtime. The estimated costs include writing, prfrrting and typing of the TER.
n.%
5/ 3 Ai4
Project 2: $155K; NRC Inspection Manual Chapters 30 staff person weeks at the Waterford 3 site working 6 days a week,10 hours1.157407e-4 days <br />0.00278 hours <br />1.653439e-5 weeks <br />3.805e-6 months <br /> a day ane round trip visit to the site one person month at INEL to write draft / final TER up to 12 people from contractor going to plant site The above estimated costs are based on the followingi INEL staff person week (nomal 40 hours4.62963e-4 days <br />0.0111 hours <br />6.613757e-5 weeks <br />1.522e-5 months <br />) =
$2200/ week Round trip to site or Washington DC 1000/ trip Per Diem costs at site or Washington DC 100/ day Rental car per four people 100/ day Cost for writing draft / final TER 11000/TER includes technical editor, writers, typing and printing INEL Project Management 5% of contract G
e Ed5/6+
l.
j l
s DATE:
May 9,1984 STATUS OF COSTS AND LEVEL OF EFFORT OF CONTRACT INEL FIN A-6319 l
Ti tle : Resolution of Waterford 3 Quality Control Allegations FIN No. : A-6819 COSTS:
Costs on the accountant's books to date:
$ 57.8K Estimated costs to date:**
131.7 Funds obligated to date:
232.0 Estimated date when cbligated funds flay
, 1984
- are expended: @@
- estimatad costs are based on amended time cards to account for overtime (7 days-a-week,12 hour1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br />s-a-day) authorized by NRC on project and on the estimated travel costs to date which has not been reported overtime
$51.8k travel 22.
@@ based on the level of effort (7 person team at Waterford 3 site for 7 days-a week, 12 hour1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br />s-a-day starting May 14, 1984).
LEVEL OF EFFORT:
The level of effort authorized in the NRC Form 173 dated May 3,1984, is estimated to be exceeded on May 19, 1984 g
Authorized Level of Effort Exceeded:
May 1984 N
1 1
[
IOh