ML20127B730
| ML20127B730 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Waterford, Comanche Peak, 05000000 |
| Issue date: | 05/29/1984 |
| From: | Harold Denton Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Barry L NRC OFFICE OF RESOURCE MANAGEMENT (ORM) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML082310426 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-84-688 NUDOCS 8406200527 | |
| Download: ML20127B730 (2) | |
Text
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
t N
- 4WD 44F
=gir DISTRIBUT. ION: h/c Enci v
Central t 11es
,May 29,1984 PPAS R/F ECase HDenton 1
vosana.
L5olander DEisenhut MEMORANDUM FOR:, Learned W Barry,. Director and Controlle~r :.
L* BARRY' - PF~C
. Off4ce of Resource Management FROM:
Haroit R. Denton, Director a-
+'
Office of Nuclear Reactor ReguTation
SUBJECT:
REVISED. MID-YEAR RESOURCE ESTIMATE
~
Ar a result of the NRC management meeting on May 18,1984', we have ieanalyzei the NRC funding requirements for Near-Terw Operating License (NTOL) and certain operating pTant reviews for the remainder of FY 1984. Based on our most recent. analysis, the NRR etd-year resource request that was submitted by Jesse Funches ta Dr.Triner on April 28', 1984 should be increased. by $2,500K.
A. markup of Exhibit 1 of the April 22,1984 is enclosed, which reflects this -
increase and other changer sine: AprtT 23 1984 Note that the resources identified included our best estimate af the effort needed for licensing reviews and inspectionr_
If it bee:mes necessary to reallocate to-other NRC offices and. regions, we wonI& submit the appropria+a reallocation requests to you.
l r
The-additionaT resources are-based err the foTTowing:
Waterford - $250C t:r ass'ist irr the review of issues, including necessary inspections that need to be closed prior to full power licensing.decisiorr_
Comanche Peak - SI,250 to assist irr the review of safety issues, inspections,. review of allegations, etc for timeTy licensing decision as identified in the draft plan developed by the assessment SE5 (T. Ippolito) s Other h70Ls (Fermi 2,. Wolf Creek,. Diablo Canyon 2, Byran I, Limerick 1, etc.) and operating reactors (San Onofre 1 restart). Although it 1s. uncertairr what needs to be accomplished on these plants. I believe that based on preliminary irrformation,. it is prudent to plan on about
{
$1,000X of effort for the remainder of FY 1984 to assist '.n the riview of potential licensing and inspection issues
~
h, 0
9
" k 3:= m no.c
.cw ouo OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
- v
.. 5 c*o 2" >--" "--
)
=..
1
"'"WlFJ "4!F
- Trf
""tllP' N
a Learmed h. Barry
-Z-I would also like to reiterate the need for additional NRR travel funds, since these funds are necessary to support the onsite work at these NTOL plants.
If you have questions, please contact Jesse Funches or Lars Sol _ander.
anomas siped by
~
LLneuem
_j::
Harold L Denton, Director Office. of Nuclear-Reactor: Regulation
Enclosure:
As stated:
cc w/o EncT :
J. Roe V. SteTTo E. Trfner R. DeYoung RegtoneT Adirrirri.%. tars
~
i f
9 f
9
'c >, D.'r.K..: P.P..A. S......
.... N. R......... 0..:. N.
.-cS.....F.u..n.c..h..e.s../.b. o EG
..H. R. 0...t. o..n........
$#.'/St
.n >
....i....
5
/.84 5
/.84 8 O $ h. S h.. A OO...M..
9%.O NW E
I. O
.2-9.
.~d.1
. ~.
COMANCHE PEAK PLAN FOR THE COMPLETION OF OUT5TANDING REGULATORY ACTIONS MAY 1984 Accroval:
K M'h*4
- Tt ( tw '**. iT.w dS.
g /c /g4, I
CD(roung,Dfrectar,IE Date
[ *2 N
/ h po,'
E.' E. Denton, Director NRR Pate' F.L....e ) \\iri u v. r.r, 5.
/
- 5 f4.
U.'Colihns,'Acministrator Date Region IV
\\
.,=.
a f A ISG 0 $
,yp s--I T' ~ f b
6
c
^
COMANCHE PEAK PLAN FOR THE COMPLETION OF OUTSTANDING REGULATORY ACTIONS
. I.
PilRPOSE AND SCOPE On March 12, 1981, the EDO directed HRR to r.anace all necessary NRC actions leading to licensing decisions for Comanche. Peak and Waterford. A copy of that dire'etive is included as Attachment.1. This plan establishes the program for Comanche Peak.
f.
p,
-The purpose of this plan is 'to assure the overall coordiriation and
^,
integration of the outstanding reguletory actions regarding Comanche Peak, and achieving their resolution prior to a licensing decision. This plan encompasses all licensing, inspection, bearing, and alleration issues.
Further, this plan addresses the scope of the work needed, specifies the critical path issues, identifies the responsible line organization, the, schedule for completion, and (where applicable)*the need for additional resources to meet the schedule.
The planned completion data for all regu.latory actions is assumed to be October 1,1984, and resource needs are predicated on that assumption. -
A status report will be issued to management every two weeks starting two weeks after the approval of the plan.
II.' BACKGROUND
~
Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station Unit 1 is in the final stages of the operating license review process. The Construction Per1 nits for Unit I and 2 were issued on December 19, 1974.
Texas Utilities docketed their application for operating licenses on April 25, 1978. The Final Environmental Statement was issued September 24, 1981.
The Safety Evaluation Report (SER) was issued on July 14,1981. -Because of the large number of outstanding issues identified in the SER, the staff recommended delaying the ACRS review.
SER Supplement No. I was issued on October 16, 1981, and the'ACRS meetine was held on November 13, 1981. The ACRS, by letter dated Hovember 17, 1981, supported issuance of an operating license.
The latest SER supplement was issued on November 23, 1983.
Comanche Peak has been in a heavily contested hearine for over two years.
All. but one contention have been di.smissed.
The remainino centention cuestions the ability of the applicent's Quality Assurance /Ouality Control Programtopreventdeficienciesinthedesignandconstructionoft.heplant.l The 1.icensing Board has admitted many allegations of design and construction deficiencies into the hearing as relevant to this contention.
The Applica1Iti are currently pro,iecting a' fuel load date for Unit 1 t'o be in late September 1984 The basis for this projection was provided te the staff on May 7, 1984 This fuel' load date appears achievable but allows no flexibility for unexpected avents in a very ticht schedule.
The number of hearing issues and uncertainty regarding the timine of the Licensing Board's initial decision may impact the fuel load.
~
g 4
D
N_.___...
~ ~ _. - -
. j
.?
2-III. PLAN FOR THE COMPLETION OF OUTSTANDING REGULATORY ACTIONS This plan describes the method in which coordinated regulatory actions are to be taken by the staff to be ready to support an NRC decision regarding Comanche Peak licensing. As stated in t encompasses all licensing, hearing, inspection, an.he Purpose, the plan d allegation issues.
This sunnary addresses the scope of wo-k needed, identifies the responsible line organization, the schedule for completion,5and the resource needs to meet the schedule.
The' management organizational arrangement responsible for directing the overall effort and coordinating actions by the verious involved offices is shown graphically in the enciosure to the EDO memorandum of March 12,1984 (Attachment 1). The management is under the overall direction of T. A. Ippolito, who reports to the* Director of the
. Division of Licensing. The managers responsible for. implementing and directing this organization are the following individuals:
Project Director (T. A. Ippolito)
- - - -i OELD Contact (J. Scinteil
- - - -101 Contact (B. Haves il NRR Action Region IV Actions IE Act1er.s (T.Novak)
(R. Bangart)
(R. DeYoung)
The line effices will continue to manage their own responsibilities regarding Comanche Peak in accordance with the schedule and objectives of this plan.
Line office activities are to be coordinated with th*
program management organization via their representative as identified above.
Additional resources are expected to be necessary to support licensing, hearing, and inspection issues, and substantial resources are necessary to respond to the approdmetely 400 allegations regarding Comanche Peak.
This pla'n proposes the femation of'an Technical Review. Team (TRT) to evaluate and resolve a number of technical issues, including allegations, presently identified.
A proposed organizational chart of the TRT is shown below.
The groups identified will be assigned to evaluate and resolve technical issues and. allegations that have been grouped into-five technical areas:
OA/QC, Electrical / Instrumentation Civil /Hechanical, Coatings, and Test Programs.
The grcups will be comprised of a group leader and reviewers that are specialists in the particular technical area.
4 h
9 A
MM M a L,-
M '
3-Comanche Peak Technical Review Team (TRT)
- Project Director Deputy Proiect Director t
, p-s 6
t --- -
Office of Investigations r,ROUP LEADERS GA/0C Electrical /
Civil / Mechanical Coa' tings.
Test Program Records Instrumentation and Operational Readiness
.. The staffing of these groups will be drawn from the various NRC offices and/or contractors as arranged between the Project Director and line management. The TRT may.be called together for a specified period of time, dispersed back to the individual's parent office, and then reconstituted in.whole or in part as needed to complete resolution of like issues.
The TRT will be under the direct supervision of the Pro.4ect Director.
In accordance with the EDO memorandum of May 25, 1984, the TRT organization is scheduled to be in place and functioning by June 4, 1984 Detailed guidance will be issued by the Project Director to the Technical Review Team and other participants in this effort.
This guidance will address the following:
Methodandapprcachforidentifibationand disposition of allecations Tracking System Preparation of Documentation and Records Protection of Individuals Initiation of Special NRC actions, such as Confirmation of *,ction Letters or 50.54(f) ietters
~
Manpower accounting Thebasisudenwhichtheschedulesandresourceestimateshavebeen developed is that the Comanche Peak fuel load date is Octcber 1, 1984 Fioure 1 is an overall schedule and Figures 2 throuch 5 are individual schedules for the resolution of Licensing, Hearing, inspection, and Allegations Regulatory Actions, respectively.
.n,,,
- 3..,
.c s
- 4~-
The major issues,.. schedules, and resource estdnetes needed to meet the schedules are summarized as follows:
A.
'Licensino Reculatory Actions Licensing Actions are those things resulting from'the design review of the FSAR.
NRR is responsible for the resolutien of these action items.
j '"
The total number of outstanding action items is 37.
Four of these action items are considered te have the potential
~
for impacting the schedule. These items relate to 1) the adequacy of the TDI diesel generators, 2) the the Applicants' exemption request for relief from GDC-4, 3) review of the Cygna Report of an independent assessment of* design and construction, and 4) electrical equipment environmental cualification.
NRR experience with other' facilities involved in complex licensing ~
reviews (Diablo Canyon, Seabrook, and Shoreham) indicates that additional project management resources are necessary. Two additional project managers for the period from slune-September.
will be needed, for a total of a man-months of additional effort.
The technical resources presently assigned by NRR to evaluate and resolve the remaining open licensing actions are sufficient to meet the schedule shown in Figure 2.
Additional IE resources are not expected to be required as the CAT inspection is complete and DA/QC reviews and emergency preparedness reviews are essentially complete.
B.
Hearino Reculatory Actions Hearing Actions are those issues in contention before the ASLP.
e There are three major issues each with a number cf sub-issuest. The three mejor issues are Design Adecuacy and Ouality Assurence, Construction Adequacy, and Construction Ouality Assurance.
There are two critical path actions:
Design Adeouacy and Construction-Adecuacy. The design adecuacy action concerns an IDVP heing performed by the Applicants at the staff's recuest.
CYGNA is perfoming the review fpr the Applicants.
This is< currently under review by the staffr Cygna personnel actions may have contributed to be prenotifi-cation of inspection. areas to Applicant 0A/0C personnel.
Resolution of this ! concern may make it necessary to request additieral independent assessment activities.
The critical path issue concerning Construction.Adecuacy is containment liner coating (painting).
I 4
9
-5_
The resources presently available are sufficient to resolve all hearing actions with the exceptinn of the critical path issues.
It is estimated'that 10 man-months are required to resolve the
.Desion Adequacy Action, and 6 ran-months to evaluate the Construction Adequacy Action (painting). The design adecuacy review will recuire a -team composed of1IE. and NRR personnel, similar eto the Cygna IDVP effort.
Coordination cf HeariAg,activiiies is expected.to bilixtensive.
~ "
and involve integrating the aq with the Technical Review Team,Q. vities nf NRR, OELD, and Reg level) is needed to manage this effort as it is expected that the Project Director will devote full time effort to management of the technical review team actions comencing June 4,194 These estimates assume that the reviews will conclude that the existing circumstances are acceptable to the staff and/or no major corrective actions are reouired of the Applicants.
Should this prove otherwise, additional resources wil1 be required for resolution.
See Figure 3 for Hearing Testimony Comoletion Schedule.
C.
Insoections Reculaterv Actions Inspection actions are those that assure that adequate completion of plant construction and the readiness of the Applicants to operate the plant.
These actions are the responsibility of Region IV.
The total number of outstanding action items is 377. These may be grouped as follows:
SER verification: 30 actions Routine construction inspections, preoperational test program and coerationel ieadiness inspections and startu: test program:
121 actions Operating Licensing:
20 actions Open items inspections (unresolved items, violations, 50.55(e) items, inspector follow-up items and Part 21 items:
201 actions Room inspections: TBD CAT follow-up:
5 acticns All the inspection items require resolution prinr to OL ' issuance.
Many recuire applicant actions prior to inspection or relate to hea rin,o, issues.
Particularly sienificant is the retest inspection effort as the applicant plans to re-run approximately 25 preoperati6nel tests to confinn system readiness subsecuent tn various modificatiers and design changes.
Many of these tests will be witnessed by the NRC and test results will be evaluated as appropriatc.
Systems involved include safecuards systems, reactor protective system, service water, component cooling water, and the diesel generatnr.
i The number of inspection' items represents a sizeable effort that i
could impact fuel load.
s
-r,_,--.
y,
,,w.wm.,
m.-~
,-.s
._-,,,w_-,,
,,.v.m.pe,.,,,_,,,,.,.,,..w.-me,_%,,,,,,s,,
p.--.,~,
mpy- _ _-
~-
j-
~
..E -
9 Some additional resources will be require'd to complete the routine inspection program and resolve the many open items.
It.is exnected that this area could require approximately A6 man-months. Considering the number of items-and based on WaterfoM experi.ence, the Region estimates that much cf this effort can be heridled with existing
~
resources but that approximately 18 man-months additional resources will be required.- See Figure 4 for the InspectionsJchedule.
?
D., A11ecations Reculatory Actions The Allegation Actions are those concerns reported by various individuals, intervenors and action groups regarding the safety of construction of the plant. Concerns regarding wrongdoings,-
intimidation, etc. are not included in -the* technical review team effort but are referred to OI or DIA r.s appropriate.
To date the number of individud a tions is approximately 400.
These actions are grouped into spet4fic categories to facilitete their resolution.
Resolutien of these actions will involve the Technical Review Team, NRR, 01, and Region IV.
The organizational group with primary responsibility for rescittion
~
of thesa acticns is the Technical Review Team (TRT). The rescurces required to re;31ve these actions are identified below according to the Team funr.onal g* cur,
Resource Functienal Grue No. of Alleoations Estimate (man-months)
OA/0C Recoros 180 U
Electrical /Instrum.
5 2
Civil / Mechanical 97 17 Coatings 11 4
Test Programs 14 2
Estimated, Totals 757 42 The TRT effort is expected to reduire additional acministrative support (secretarial) of approximately 3 man-months. Hence, the total TRT resource needs are a5 man-nonths.
The total' program for resolving the allegations actions is a critical path item.
See Figure 5 for the schedule for completien of the review of these allegations.
a.-
6
, 'g e 7-In addition,'g7 allegations will Ebe handled by the following nffices:
Responsible Functional Group ~~
No. of A11ecations:
- Head Office Jntimidation 30 OI Design Pipe / Pipe Supp, orts 19 NRR Vendor / Generic 18 Ap "
NRR/IE independent Assessment Program 7
~
. Miscellaneous 23 RIV Design of pipe and pipe supports, and the. Independent Assessment Program allegations will be dispositioned by NRR personnel that are handling these issues for the hearings.
Intimidation allegations will require additional OI resources, as discussed later in this section. Existing resources in the Vendor Inspection Branch, IE and NRR will disposition the vendor / generic allegations.
Existing resources in Region IV will be responsible for the miscellaneous allegations.
E.
Office of Investication Actions OI actions are those actions necessary to support the resolution of allegations.
They involve issues where wrong-doing, intimidation,
, or harrassment may be involved.
It is clear that with the present resources assigned to the Comanche Peak investigation (one investigator) the schedule for resolving the allegations and wrongdoing issues will not be met. We estimate several additional investigators will be required on full time basis from Jur.e through September, for a total of 12 man-months of effort.
During this 4-month period OI will require the full-time sucport of one individual with a technical background, as many allegetions are a combination of technical and wrong-doing issues, for a total of 4 tan-nonths.
The hR." staff effort to complete the actioks in the licensing, hearings, inspecticas and allegations areas will be substential and the impact will be felt by several Offices.
The foregoing ~ sunnary lists a total of 821 separate actions recuiring approximately 100 man-months of effort above the existing (budgeted) resources, personnel for much of this effort will be obtained from contractors.
It is estimated that approximately $1 million will be necessary to fund contractor assistance in support nf Conanche peak reviews during the remainder of FY 1984 The estimates are somewhat fragile and assume-that no major new issues are raised, that the Applicants meet their projected schedule, and that ' staff review of the identified issues will concluce that the existing circumstances, or the resolution, is acceptable.
u.,,---e#,---u--r yv
,39,-,-
,-w.-
vm-.mw.7--,-w
,,..-s,---,3-,,3-,,----r.w-m,
,-,--,,,y,wy-yi,,,,,-=,y--
J.-
,.a g**
UNITED STATES
.c
,(f k N0 CLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
~
- ~ -
ggg wum= crow. o. c.mosas S
MAR 121534
~
~
r
' MEMORANDUM.FOR: John T. Collins, Regional Administrator g
Region IV
~
Harold R. Denton, Director
'3It Of" ice of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Richard C; DeYoung, Director
- Office of Inspection 1, Enforcement FROM:
William J. Dircks Executive Direcar for Operations
SUBJECT:
COMPLETION OF OUT3TAMDING REGULATORY ACTIONS ON CDMANCHE PEAK AND WATERFORD Construction of the Comanche Peak and Waterford facilities is nearing completion. There remain a number of issues that need to be resoived before the staff can sake its licensing decisions. The issues remaining for these plants are quite complex and span more than one Office.
In order *J assure the overall coordination / integration of these issues and to assure issues are resolved.on a schedule to satis *y hearing and 11 censing decision needs, I as directing NRR to manage all necessary NRC actions leading to pro =ct licensing decisions. Darrell Eisenhut, Director, Division of Licensing, NRR is being assigned the lead responsibility for this activity.~ 'He wf1T coordinate the efforts of NRR, IE, and Region IV, and will coordinate this activity with 01 and OELD.
Prior to any of the affected Offices undertaking major activities (e.c., inspections) or making. decisions on these plants, that activity should be concurred in by NRR;
(
We are present1y in the process of assigning a dedicated senior manager to assist Mr. Eisenhut in the management of these activities..
4 The first phase of this program will be the identificztion of issues ~ needed to be resolved for each plant pHor to heaHng and licensing deefsiens.
4 Once the issues have been identified a Program. Plan for resolution of each item should be diiveloped and implemented. The Program Plan should address the scope of the work needed, the identification of the responsible line organization, and the schedule for completion.
In principle, this effort will therefore be similar to the effort undertaken regarding the allegation review on Diablo Canycr. exceot that this effort should encompass all licensing, inspection, hearing, and allegation issues.
&N
,,__.,.__.-___._.,m__.__._
__m
a.
y.
. ~
2-Each affected Office will assign a full time senior manager to work with NRR to define, schedule and complete the issues.
I expect these managers to be identified by each of you within a few days. All affected.cffices should provide dedicated resources and give their full support to 'this effort, to assure that all existing issues are expeditiously handled and all new issues are promptly provided to NRR so. as not to delay the licensing _ decisions.
~
addition, copies of all information, documents, depositions,otte, should beIn promptly provided to NRR to ensure a coo,@ated approach.
I anticipate that the approach utilized here will be necessary for a number out this activit,y.of upcoming OL projects, and am directing NRR to take th q
. se W1111a MJ. Dircks Lxecutivr Dinctor for Operations E. Cunnin cc:
X. Hayes,gham, ELD OI em O
e s.
e 4
,- I
1 i
1 r
F TOVERAU. ty.NAGDiENT
-COORDINATION (NRR)
P 01 Conuc
., a.,
ELD ConuC t
t i
~
Overall Review Cf "f
Review of Ot5i9" Ox rat on e
an Issues (p,9 Iy)
(RRR) e4 6
O e
i 6
e e
o e
e e
e e
e 9
O eam e e
6 e
-b e
e I
e O*
O D
e v.
--~, -,
,n,.,,,,. _ _ _ -,., _
,g.,,,_,_
._,e
.,_,-w
,,,.n__,._
,,_,e
~
~
~'A
- j t
h s
L e
W
.CC l
, e,
[
.. J. "
b W
W t
g
=O i
5 I
b t
g t
b I
W 8
M s
8 4
4 8
5
,3 v
1
+ =
8 8
6 I
E l
1 i
e l
l
=
e i
e-a.
l 5
i
=
,=
8 8
g
=.
g l
l v
s i
W
=
H I
C m
,i e
i u
e 8
8 4
C 8
1 w
g I
8 1
g 8
8
.I y
w w
. g l
l l
e E
t 3
i, w
i
,=
w 5
l l
l
=
l
=
i u
e E
I l
l l
E l
l l
l
,=
l
.i e
e 8
.i 0
,i
,e e
i i
i s
=
x x
x
=a
>.m a
C4 E
e=
.e wW e.
-e m
u -
e h
E W 4 C
-M
=g c..
v 5 h
{
a ~-
u
=
WV 4 W E4
".*J C.
C E
.i' l!
,51 r
,i!.!~
c II l.
I*
'I 9
h l
o t
?
l c
O l
)
I
)
)
r e
b m
i e
t p
e l
S
~
i k\\
t I
s e
u g
I X
X u
A I
~
y I
l u
e E.
J I
I U
D I
E l
l K
C A
S E
?
P I
D I
t E
I e
a l
V n
N i
C E
u I
16 N
R J
A l
f M
G I
D N
C I
S
(
t E
C I
I
~
L y
I a
M i -
(
t t
"t t
[
n S
S E
en I
1 H
D
[
I li S
5 S
N bt DE 0
D l
i a I
sz SI I
ni E,
E E
E S
IF5 1
on DS D
D D
D D'
0 D
5 pa
/F
/
/
/
/
/,
/
sg Rl R
R R
R RL R
i er RD R
R R
R RD R
RO N
l N
N N
l i
l I
f I
.s p
nn dsi d
sn d
n f n eel
)
e n
ei e
v i
ti sun s
s i
. n ua3 r
n
)
. a ca l sI n
i a
ni sm i
i s
sm em a s c.
n at m ea se; yu 0a;m de pe Hi n i
Rne Gm I R e) r q1 1 mee nR SR y
us oe eut o
s7(l a sc gR i
t aR e
r nssm tRt ;Rsi Cs l s e
ac ei s n
o eese a
ie s -
e ae u;.ii ul e i3 t
puit msnssih eu cu sCncf spu d
an Os i
r eU n e u
ss i s sGini sps n;
l o sI -
i u euI s ns ns ui RiHh f srcsH eI hI mna I
I aal i As as gt A
T u nsoisT2 c
c w y ci u wy st I
t r ec S4( s oIfLI(1 i2 e5 ebPFD eb6 uL RA F
C L
T N
n lP l
2 3
a 5
6 7
rii'l>;
ll
- 1l) l ll l,
t l
io t
c O
o i
re i
b me tps e
S i
i l:
i6 S
t le s
ui g
u I
E A
L J'
D X
i E
l lC S
L A
T y
i T
l i
X I
i I
X t
l.
ip il I
X S
D K
N
(
(
A A
- 1. Y'E N
O
-.f I
e I
t T
n f i i l.
A u
i W x
l R
l.
I l
A IG P
8 f
E I
C R
P
(
C
(
(
Y N
0 I
y 1
l i
a X
T t
I S
i~
E I
X T
(
(
(
(
G lf F
D i
/
R E
.E R
A E
I I
R e
E I
I c
I I
n D
r I
eo I
L V
o li L
S E
I
)
F bt D
O R
L 11 i a f
k
)
sz A
s T
ni E
E L
E L
a R
on D
D D
D
(
T T
pa
/
/
/
/
(
sg R
R R
T T
R V
I T
V V
er R
R R
R R
R I
D R
I I
m RO l
l i
- h H
T T
H R
T T
g ae n
T a) i l s c
n
)
w Pn s
s c
s w
y n
l e e
r
/
m e
e i
ac s
o a
n i
i se nt a
t u) u r
cis u
d r
ei c
v tt
' c nn r
r sp s
e iDr o
k sT nt i
e nn a
t n ie g
o su s
n r
o e
l e ac h
R y
ee n
no t m o
p i
w I
e el t n
ad c re S
g r
m g
ac ass rs ps n
G maa a
l i
l ui C p r
nl o
ns y
c dse Pe e
g1 g
a vr l
l h s
r r
i a
t es C
iD I
au u
S u n1 n
r s ae l
f ca rn o
i
,'s t c an pe l/
cirs C
s i
n i
o nl n e
f nC ai r
i i l n es P
pl l
i as Qs es dF t
d aee c
ai l e r
mn ui d s A
p(
t i
/I pi i(
a n
rDG s
t
('
oR i
l i
i h gt nA I
A n
A i
c o
e T
i S
P l
Lc ec I
I 0
P C
V I
i l
l e
RA f
I T 4^.*
a h
a a
h c
1 2
3 4
S 6
7 8
- l.'
i' iI (l
l
.. ::: 1
,.1 c
FIGURE 4 J
COMANCilE PEAK SCllE0 HIE INSPECTIDH AND REGIONAL RESPONSIBILITIES' April May June July
'lX----------
a-i
. A.ugus t September October I
I I
I I
I i
i i
i i
i i
i I
l -- :-
Construction Inspec..
--X HC 2512 Construction Inspec.
X----------
X Items followup 50.55(e) Items,
-X-----------
X Part ?! Items Followup.,
Primarily Preoperation X Prima rily-Test Wilmessing2-Proc edures Review-------Test Ir.spections HC ?513
X Prcopera tional Results Review lespec. Items X----------- -----------,
X followup Startup Test X----------- -Procedures R eview X Post-DL- - - - - - -
Progrce inspec.
,------ -------------------X IK 2514 Hitnessing i
I.
Operational X
(
X (final Rpt) i Readiness Report ij{,
j per flodule 94300 SER Verification X-Items from SSER's 1-4 Items from SSER 5 X
X-(
l IE Bulletins inspec.
X------------
i
X tiscellaneous X------------ ------------- ------------- ------------- ---------X Allegations licsolia t ion II ign ra tor I.icensing
'X--------- --------X
- s-'l F tr.C E 5 t
CflMANCllE PEAK i
~'
s Allenations Resolution Schedule-j Apr11 May Junc
.luly August September Octoher.
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I 1.
Plan Approval X
I I
,1, i
?.
Personnel I
X-- ---X Arrangement 3.
Obtain Logistic X------ --- X Support 4.
Develop Review X---------- ---X Packages i,
5.
Task Force X
Briefing &
Assignments 6.
First Site X--X
[
Review Period i
~
7 Second Site X-. ---X Review Period 1.
Third Site X-----)
Review Period 1
Prepare Final X ----X Draft SSER i 'L 0.
11ana gemen t
\\
X---X Review l.
Final Report X----X
~
7.
Submit Report X
tn A58.8 I
es i
, =, - _
)*
'3vut 5 Dated: M. l!B4
^ l 0FFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION PROJECT IDENTIFICATION S!.w.ARY (PIDS) f e
I uLE:
Evaluation of Selected NRC' Open items Before Plant Fuel Load FIN:.
///
A-6819 CDNTRACT NUMEER (Non-00E):
R&R NUMBER:
NRR OPERATINE PLAN 20-19-4041-1 DIVISION:
BRANCH:,
PROJECT wnEER:-
~
DL TAPME Jack N. Donohew, Jr.
CONTRACTOR: Idaho National Engineering Lab
. CDNTRA C METHOD:
DOE Work Order CITY, STATE (Non-DDE):
SMALL BUSINESS / MINORITY CDNTRACT (Non SUS-CONTRACTOR (5): None YEI / /
NO /y/
AMOUNT r_
PROJEu.w PERIOD OF PERFORMANG START: 4/2/g4 END:///30/84 i
PROJEt.,e FINANCIAL DATA (00T.s)
PROJECT i
FY 19EI4 TOTAL 10iAL iOTAL CARRY a 54 FY 855 FY 91K5 VALUE ORLIG COSTED DVEM-EUDG BUDG BLOG h
n n
n.
[
i.
n n
AP;tICATION (RELATE THE PROJECT TD A SFECIFIC PLANNED ACCDMPLISHMENT)
NRR FYB4 Operating Plan:
Case work Decision Unit Plan,ned Accomplishment Power Reactor Revie Construction of several plants is nearing completion.
low power licensing decision for the plant. issues that need to be evaluated a
can make its HRR to evaluate selected open' NRC issues for the plant before the plant fuel lT oad.
O b
- o f
8 e
l I
6 D
G 8
f a
2 REDUIREwkNTS (DESCRIBE WHAT-15 TO BE PERFORMED)
TRt:
The contractor will evaluate how the applicant has met the tiRC requi selected NRC open items for the plant and,provic.e a Technical Evaluatio rements for the discussing his findings and conclusions.
eport Project 1:
Reso'1'ution of Waterford 3 Quality Co'ntrol Allegations
~FYB4 Contractor Beliverables' NRC Licensin'g Actions
. f. 1 2
y
& 2. ~, Re d % f C-o w O **
c.A,azhvA z
NfC Ll **
1--
NO "p
I
- ~
MODIFICATIONS (DESCRIBE MAJOR CHANGEI TO THE PROJECT) g Aw Q.d b.2 Aa4 6 ace.la.} tt y FN p sp.
v CDMPLETE AS APPLICAELE -
^
Recer.rnended:
Endorsed:
Endorsed:
A Endorsed:
PRQECT MANAGER SECTION LDR BRANCH CHF G
Accrev c:
dtk.
M4 i
_rJEs.
,o.ME&ities)
ASST DIR.
01 (
H s Jre-
<d6+
a A DV P
JeraficD,te).
lk2 9
{p%E4
' tvt-b i
6h M 6lyfW)}-
6 p6g/M
- .4pa*-
w-
~_
. A t a c~.:. ni 1
. '. 077]CE OT HUC1. EAR REACTOR RIGULATION FIcJ!.CT. IDD62TICATICH SU"."*RY (PIDS)
~
' {;: e }.
'~'
- h...,
AIN 2 01SS4,r.ay 11' 1954 Rev.2
- l
- -I..;
3c,,
3,,
Resciution cf ;;aterfert Uni: 3 Quality Centrol Allega.tions
(.hiiir r
r '.y, Y r'
Ann
. A-c4*
- ./.
CDxTnCT N1D'.EER (x n-00E):
$LEHU".EEE:
' gr.7. OPET.ATING PL*Ji 20-1 c-4 0-4)-1 INDU U
- 01Y152Cx:
EEANCF..
F'0 JECT."ANAGF.R:"
DL TAFMG Jack Denchew", Jr.
?,s it CC:;73CTOR: INEL(IGLG)
CITT, STATE (N:n.00E):
CONT 4.ACT.u.ETF.OD: LCE ;;:irr C.-der
^
SP.ALL EU52NE53/".ING.:.ITY CONT 7.AC~ (N I
T
.IUE-CCNTF.ACTOE(5 ): No TES / /
NO /I/
A"."OU 3
--.,0D G. -.r...:
...~
.r..::
r e: -.
-i.:.
57a.-.
- r...
,../S. -
...,. :./ w,, o..
wa.
a FysiW:
= = *.
~"'
V
'.".~in..
.....d.
7
..w.....
n S - c,.n.
_Oy ;
sit;;
r*..~,.'.'
4 5 g,.....
pg
_-.e.
5&ay a o
o-X s_T g
- 1-o 0
. _ 3 :... g n..
n u..
....- =.=.
n.
~--
.. \\ r..g.
.W a.
va.
m:. r m.;.::.ws s g..eg,r:.'. r 2 C gs...
.l r
.s:.a ns.mu..p, g g..g 7. )
....-a s s
- ?
- . Fici. 0.:e. a ti:n. ' :'; an : Castwerk Decisien Unit, Pia.r.nec Act:=;iish Fewer Reett:r Reviews This contract is ;:revide assistance to :RC in resolving aliegatio cent ci practices curing the ::ns: uction. cf Va te-fort. Unit 2 clantns effi=:reper quali*y sus; be rescived in the nett furtre,. :
'. icer. sing ce:isict: by HRC f=r 'his pian:.adcid a ::ter.tial deiey in the ic.These allegations we.-
=*
2-M
.s.-
M ae -
a,,-
~^
Eh.
,. $~2 ]
/
~
'WCKK REC:UI:.E5!Eh'75 (DEICRIEE WHAT I5 70 EE FERFOR".ED)
The contracter.riil evaluate the alleged im:r:per cuality c:ntrei practic dec.=entarie::. tad will doc==ent his evaluation wh e
cnnce af his findings and the eene-ic impiications of his findings as~they rein a to the facility.
~
~
- P.
L.
...iThe centractor wii7 provide an interi= Technical Evaluation Rep 31 ; final TER:. Tne interi= TER will be an i:=ediate repor:
low power licensing decision for the plant.NRC. Stz.ff to addres te be'.used by the s
e T-Tne final a c.n v141 he pr vided within four weeks of the interim TER.
Cent: ac'er Deliverables FY gr, Inte-i= TER
.rinal TEK 1-
~
3.
. - ~.
d s.
~
o W '1 fiODIFICATICI:S (DESCRIEE RAJDR C.*-3:GE5 TO T.-iE :ROJECT)
', Mod. Mc. 1:
Increase 'he esti=ateg value of the ; :je::
Ir. rtasa is a nigner.evel of effer f-.= II CD!: c II;2);,
he of the :uality c:nt :1 ' allegations. A. rate e:r 2 in a -imeiv::::;e:e One eva lua negeg: ;;
- = acvoid :::ential delays in the iow ranne -
- an.
- ewer I:censir; :ecision hr :ne Adcitief.al increase in the estir.atet value cf the project
..cd Mc. 2:
higner sevel,c.f effer from the contracter is now estima,.ced ::
Decause a needed to c:mplete the evaluations in a -imely manner ( This inc 7
be the est: mated value cf the proje::
r g g 7 g, eases,
- {-
fr--
e---
g
' Mod No. 3: Transfer $155X to FIN A-6821. Transfer project on the evaluation of how the applicant for Waterford 3.has; met se:iec-tes-parts o4-tha_NRC. tect.:.:
in NRC General Inspection Procedures Manual Chapters 2512, 2513 and 2514; 2 net I of IE Bulletin 79-14 and cf the Independent Design. Verification Program (IDVP) which is estimated to be the 5155K.to FIN A 6E21 with the funes.
COMPLETE A5 AFFLJCAELE -
%q
- e::= enced:
Encers er:' '
Endorsed:
Encersed:
Ac:reved:
- CJECT f.ANAGED SECTION !.DR BRANCH CHF ASST DIR.
DIV. DIR U.(.3 e
n.-
g s.
F. Miraclia Dt.\\. f p w1 E5 ennut (Initials) b, "./ 91 !.
N e
..jw gi g
(Date) 4b
~
..y
,.,g,y m-
_.. _nn _.m OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION PROJECT IDENTIFICATION
SUMMARY
(PIDS)
'JUN 2 0 1994 TITLE: Resolution of Comanche Peak Quality Control A-]egations FIN: A -6819 Proiect 2 CONTRACT NUMBER (Non-DOE):
B&R NUMBER:
NRR OPERATING PLAN 20-19-4Q-41-l
' INDEI NO.:
DIVISION:
BRANCH:.
PROJECT MANAGER:*J.,Donohew.'
'(
DL TAPMG CONTRACTOR:
INEL~(EG&G)
CONTRACT METHOD: DOE Work-Order CITY, STATE (Non-DOE):
SMALL BUSINESS /MINDRITY CONTRACT (N
'5US CONTRACTOR (5) 4 YES / /
NO /X /
AMOUNT $
PROJEQt.o PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE START:.06/06/84-END:ll/30/84 PROJECTED FINANCIAL DATA (000'.s)
PROJECT FY M931984 TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL CARRY FY BUDgG FY gl 85 Fy M 86 VALUE OBLIG COSTED OVER BUDG MOK 0
0 0;
MK.
BUDG 0
0 APPLICATION (RELATE THE PROJECT TO A SPECIFIC PLANNED' ACCOM NRR FYS4 Operation Plan: Casework Decision Unit, Planned Accomplish Power Reactor Reviews This contract is to provide assistance to NRC in resolving allegations of improper quality control practices during the construction of Comanche Peak plant. These allegations must be resolved in the near future to avoid a potential delay in the low power licensing decision by NRC for this plant 1.
c' e
~."
C O
m e
- eule
(
-eme
- ~,
r -- - - - - -,
--t.., -- - - - -
r,
,,-,n-e,,,
,,-----m,--
,-,-,--,vn,,-.wr-.
,~,.-,,,---,,e,
- - ~
2-WORK REQUIREMENTS-(DESCRIBE WHAT IS 70 BE PERFORMED)
The car. tractor will evaluate the alleged improper quality control practice during the construction of Comanche Peak by a review of associated-QA/QC documentation and
. will document his eva]uation which will give the significance 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 final TERs.
The interim'TER will be an imediate report to be used by the NRC staff to address the alleged improper quality.econtrol practices in the low power licensing dect' ion for the pla'nt.
The final TER will be proyidsd *.
s within four weeks of the interim TER.
'e Contractor Deliverables FY84 Interim TER 1
Final TER 1
~
MODIFICATIONS (DESCRIBE MAJOR CHANGES TO THE PROJECT)
COMPLETE A5 APPLICABLE -
Reconnended:
Endorsed:
Endor
,\\&
Endorsed:
Appr
. PROJECT MANAGER
_SECTION LDR BRAti eW ASST.DIR.
DIV,gved:
h % neho f4ft h
- I w
au F
hacli-
[D_
b$rleA-b N
bb e
6lb nhut (}nitials)
Q}/flN
} a+(
(cate)
M M+
sp-/A
n
-~. - --
m -
OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION PROJECT IDENTIFICATION SUP.'%RY (PIDS)
'Jt R 2 0 toe 4 TITLE: Evaluation of Selected Open NRC Activities at ?!TOL S~ites Needine Action BEfore Plant Fuel Load FIN: A -6821 CONTRACT NUMBER (Non-DOE):
B&R NUMBER:
NRR OPERATING PLAN
' INDEI NO.
20-19-70-00-1
)
DIVISION:
BRANCH:.
PROJECT MANAGER:-
2" J..Donohew.'
DL-TAPMG l
CONTRACTOR: INEL CONTRACT METHOD: DOE Work Order CITY, STATE (Non-DOE):
SMALL BUSINESS / MINORITY CONTRACT (No
.MUS-CONTRACTOR (5): None YES / /
NO / x/
AMOUNT $
~
PROJECTED PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE START:
END:
05/13/84 1.1/30/84 PROJECTED FINANCIAL DATA (000'.s)
PR' O' JECT FY H531984 TDIAL TOTAL TOTAL CARRY FY @
FY 8x85 FY 8886 VALUE OBLIG
_CO5TED DVER BUDG BUDG BUDG
@5 0
0 0,
@5 0
0 APPLICATION (RELATE THE PROJECT TO A SPECIFIC PLANNED ACCOMP NRR FY84 Operating Plan: Management Direction and Support This technical assistance contract is to provide assistance to NRC to resolve selected o' pen NRC Inspection activities at NTOL sites which need action before the plant fuel lead.
This contract is to evaluate how the applicants have" met the NRC requirements in NRC General Inspection Procedures Manual Chapters 2512, 2513 and 2514; in IE Bulletin l
79-14 and in thelindesiendent Design Verification ~ Program (IDVP).
i l
(
~
~J l
i
{
L l
l i
n.
2
, kORK REOUIREMENf5 (DESCRIBE WHAT IS TO BE PERFORMED)
The contractor will evaluate how the applicants for Waterford Unit 3 and Comanche Peak have met the NRC requirements. in selected parts of the NRC General Inspection Procedures Manual Chapters 2512, 2513 and 2514; of IE Builetin 79-14 and of the Independent Design Verificatiory 7rogram (IDVP).
The contractor will report his fidd'ings and conclusions in a Technical Evaluation
~
Report.
. ~
k,
,j Project 1 FYB4
[;
~
~~
~
Waterford 3 Contractor Deliverab'le 1
~
Project 1 Licensing Action 1
~
. Project 2 Comanche Peak Contractor Deliverable 1
Project 2 Licensing Action 1
MODIFICATIONS (DESCRIBE MAJOR CHANGES TO THE PROJECT)
(1) A new Project No. 2 has been added to this FIN for $250K.
COMPLETE AS APPLICABLE -
~~ ~
Reccamended:
Endorsed:
Endorse FROJECT MANAGER SECTION LDR BR5NCH ASSI DIR.
_DI V. EI R Endorsed:
Approved:
i &nche Ah r
R h
( orm, raclia a
(Initials) '
ut vg < Data N4
@[ p n
._m_.._
31 Dated: flav M*,1988 OFFTCE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION PROJECT IDENTIFICATI0h SUMMART (PIDS) r TITLE: Evaluation of Selected Open ?!RC Activities at Waterford Unit 3 Site FIN:
__i---
n..s4.
ar <an n..r.. olen-n1 tend A-6221 St.e d 1 CDNTRACT NUMEER (Non-00E):
BTJr NUMBER:
NRR OPERATINE PLAE 20-19-70-00-1 NO :
DIYlIION:
DL BRAN n 7APMG PROJECT MANAGER:' Jack' N. Do'nchew, 'Jr. "
" E CDiiTRAFTDR: Idaho National Enginee.-ing LaboratorfDNTMACT METHOD:
DOE Work Order CITY,. STATE (Non-00E):
SMALL BUSINEI5/ MINOR!IT CDNTRACT (No SUS-CDNTRACTDR(5): Hone' YE5' / /
NO / x/
Amount T
~
PROJu..w PERIOD OF PERFCRMANCE.
START: 5/13/84 END: 7/31/84 PROJu aw TINANCIAL DATA (00CT'.r)
PROJECT FY 19lbt
, iciAL TOTAL ToiAL C.ARRY H DC Fr 8KE FY 856 VALUE ORLIE CD5TED DVER-BUDir BUDG BUDG
, ".,tSS 0
0 0
155 0
0 APPL 2 CATION (RELATE THE PROJECT TO A SPECIFIC PLANNED
'NRR FYB4 Operating Plan: Management Dtrection and Support This technical assistance contract is to provide assistance to f RC to resolve selected open ?!RC Inspectiori activities at Waterford Unit 3 site which need action before the plant fuel load.
This ccetract is to evaluate how the applicant has me the NRC requirements in NRC General Znspection Procedures Manual Chap.ters n the Independent Design Verification Program (IDVP).2512, 2513 and 2514; in IE i
4,e 1
~.,, *
.~
/
1 k
b o
e
.e - =
-t-r w
-w,i.-
--e=-v.-wr=-*-w
-v-9ew w w
-w-ie-w-w-,w
-,ww
-ww-e--ww wv-e-ii.--r----w-+
vw-=-
wy--w
-w--
=---ww-
w
v-w
e e.-.-..
%e
-2
" ' TRK REQUIREMENTS (DESCRIBE WHAT IS TU 8E PERFORPG)
Tne contractor will evaluate how the applicant for Waterf requirement: in selected pa t 1512, 2513 and 2514; of.IE Bulletin 79-14 and of thr s of Chapters Verification Program (IDVP).
e Independent Casign The contractor will report. his findings and conclusion in Report.
a Technical Evaluation.
Contractor Deliverable.
pyg4
.. u Licensing Action
~
1
~
1 e
O o
Q e
O e
e e
m 3.
e D
4 4
e e
S I
l i
M FLETE As ApptycAgtg,,,
32co*>rnended:
Encers ea-fROJECTP.ANAGQ h'ECION5DR r%u
- r. + 1 h 2 [s;i,,s.s,,,,
S E
d:
A:grovee:
(.
_B g
4-(Date) s 1
(
l
?
i JUN 201984 i
OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION PROJECT IDENTIFICATION
SUMMARY
(PIDS)
TITLE: Evaluation of Selected Open NRC Activities at Comanche Peak Site Needing Action Before Plant Fuel Load gg*,A-6821 Project 2 CONTRACT NUMBER (Non-DOE):
hRNUMBER:
NRR OPERATING PLAN 20-19-70-00-1
'INDEX NO.:
DIVISION:
8 RANCH:.
PROJECT MANAGER:
J. Donohe CONTRACTOR: INEL CONTRACT METHOD: DOE Work'Orde-CITY, STATE (Non-DOE):
SMALL BUSINESS / MINORITY CONTRAC SUS-CDNTRACTOR(5):
none,
YES / /
NO /x/
AMOUNT 3 PROJECTED PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE START:
END:
06/05/84' 11/30/84 PROJECTED FINANCIAL DATA (000'.s)
PROJECT FY 20001984 TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL CARRY fYEd VALUE 0BLIG COSTED OVER
_BUDG
_BUDG
_BUDG FY M 85 FY 8586 750 0
0 0
250 0
0 APPLICATION (RELATE THE PROJECT TO A SPECIFIC PLANNE NRR FyB4 Operating Plan: Management Direction and Support This technical assistance contract is to provide assistance to NRC to resolve selected opIn NRC Inspection activities at Comanche Peak site which need action before the plant fuel load.
This contract is to evaluate how the applicant has niet the NRC requirements in NRC General Inspection Procedures Manual Chapters 2512, 2513 and 2514; in IE Bulletin 79-14 and in the Independent Design Verification. Program (IDVP).
c.
.. _ _, _ _ _ _ -... _,. _ _... _,,.. _ _ _ _ _ _. _ _ _. _ _.. _, _. - _ _ _ _ _ _ _... _ _ _ _.... _ _. _ _, _ _ ~. _ -.,. _. _ - _ _ _..
WORK REQUIREMENTS '(DESCRIBE WHAT IS TO BE PERFORMED)
The contractor will evaluate how the applicant for Comanche Peak Unit has met the NRC rs'quirements in selected parts of the NRC GenrrilInspection Procedures Manaual Chapters 2512, 2513 and 2514; of IE Bulletin 79-14 and of the Independent Design V2rificationProgramlIDVP).
The contractor will report his findings add conclusion in a Technical Evaluation Report.
'FY84 Centractor Deliverable
- 1 a -+
Licensing Action 1
(
~.
~
~
MODIFICATIONS (DESCRIBE MAJOR CHANGES TO THE PROJECT)
COMPLETE A5 APPLICABLE R2ccernended:
Endorsed:
Endorsed:
u A Endorsed:
PROJECT MANAGER SECTION LDR BRANCH,CV V
ASST.DIR.
DIV. MI R Approved:
i n~ n n w h
G unia Y3;,
t%
L 6/f <Du F
clia g
e nut (Initials)
G u~ c y
\\atm
'~'
6/Jf*
he; UYl?1 pg
_ ~.
JUN 2 3 584
\\
\\
s 1
0FFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION PROJECT IDENTIFICATION
SUMMARY
SHEET (PIDS) l TITLE: Evaluation of Selected NRC Open Items liefore Plant Fuel Load (Program II)
FIN: A-0802 CONTRACT NUMBER (Non-DOE):
B&R NUMBER:
NRR,0PERATING 20-19-40-41-1 PLAN INDEX NO.:
DIVISION:
^" "*TAPMG ROJECT MANAGER:
DL J. Donchew CONTRACTOR: Lawrenca Livermore nati Lab CONTRACT METHOD: DOE Work Order CITY, STATE (Non-DOE):
SMALL BUSINESS / MINORITY CONTRACT (Non-t'OE):
SUBCONTRACTOR (S): none YLS / /
NO /x/
AMOUNT $
PR5JECTEDPERIODOFPERFORMANCE START:
END:
06/11/84 11/30/84 PROJECTED FINANCIAL DATA (000's)
P'ROJECT FY 1984 TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL CARRY FY84 FYBE FYB6 VALUE OBLIG COSTED OVER EtIDG BUDG BUDG 100 0
0 0
Gb0 0
0 APPLICATION (RELATETHEPROJECTlTOASPECIFICPLANNEDACCOMPLISHMENT)
NRR FYB4 Operation Plan: Casework Decision Unit, Planned Accomplishment Power Reactor Reviews i
Construction of several plants is nearing completion. At some plants there are a number of issues, that need to be evaluated in a timely nenner before the NRC :
staff can makeits low power licensing decision for the plant.
This contract is to provide assistance to NRR to evaluate selected open NRC issues for the plant.before.the plant fuel load.
~
e
,.c
_r
.._m.
.. ~
m---.-..
y
-^
^~
pi. WORK REQUIREMENTS (DESCRIBE WHAT IS TO BE PERFORMED)
The contractor will evaluate the alleged improper practice'during the construction of Comanche Peak by a review of associated QA/QC documentation and will document his cvaluation which wi1T give the significanmof his findings and the generic implications of his findings as they relate to the facility.
The contractor will $vvide a'n interim Technical Evaluation Report (TER) and 1 final TER. - The interim TER will be an inmediate report' to be used by the NRC staff to address the alleged improper practicas in the l'ow power licensing decision forffne plant.. The final TER will be provided within four weeks of the interim TER.
CONTRACTOR DELIVERABLES FY84 Interim TER 1
Final TER 1
~
M0QFICATIONS(DESCRIBEMAJORCHANGESTOTHEPROJECT) 9 f
i
,2 COMPLETE AS APPLICABLE -
Reco:xnended:
Endorsed:
Endorsep Th P?CKCT MANAGER SECTION LOR BRANC M. g ff, ff
'd e
aelia 67 nut (Initials)
- N 9@^
6/eH Do t
6/s
<0,i,3 3
r el@
ni.V:w.if Jr."
20 QFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION PROJECT IDENTIFICATION
SUMMARY
SHEET (PIDS)
TIRE.
Resolution of Comanche Peak Allegations A-0802 FIN: Project 1 CONTRACTNUMBER(Non-DOE):
B&R NUMGER:
NRR 0PERATING 20-19-40-41-1 PLAN INDEX NO.:
DIVISION:
BRANCH:
PROJECT MANAGER:
DL-TAPMG J. Donohew CONTRACTOR: LLNL CONTRACT METHOD: DOE Work Order CITY, STATE (Non-DOE):
SMALL BUSINESS / MINORITY CONTRACT
.(Non-DOE):
SUBCONTRACTOR (5): NO YES / /
NO /x/
AMOUNT $
PROJECTED PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE
~ START: 04/02/84 END: 05/30/84
- PROJFCTED FINANCIAL _ DATA (000's)
PROJECT FY 1984 10fAL TOTAL TOTAL CARRY FYB4 FY85 FYB6 VALUE OBLIG COSTED OVER BUDG BUDG BUDG
@0 0
0.
0 200 0
0 APPLICATION (RELATETHEPROJECT:TOASPECIFI;PLANNEDACCOMPLISHe.ENT) i NRR FY84 Operation Plan:
Casework Decision Unit, Planned Accomplish Power Reactor Reviews This contract is to provide assistance to NRC in resolving allegations of impropsr practices during the constcuction of Comanche Peak plant.
These allegations must be resolved in the near future to avoid a potential delay in the low power licensing decision by NRC for this plant.
I s
e e
l I
i
g. WORK REQUIREMENT $'(DESCRIBE WHAT 15 TO BE PERFORMED)
Ibe contractor will evaluate how the applicant has met the NRC requirements for the selected NRC open items for the plant and provide an interim and finel Technical Evaluation Report discussing his findings and conclusions.
FY84 Project 1:
Resolution o'f Comanche Peak Qual,ity Control, Allegations Y"
2
, Contractor Deliverables NRC Licensing Actions l '.
_MODIFICATlDNS (DESCRISE MAJOR CHANGES TO THE PROJECT) s COMPLETE A5 APPL]CA7.E - --
r Recorrrnended:
Endorsed:
Endorsed:
Endorsed:
Approved:
IRCXCT MANAGER SECT 10N LDR M ANfH CHF ASST'DIR.
DIV.jpIF Demehew queu de i ove4 t
g F.
Vt:lia nut (Initials) o
<C.,,,
//*
bb l
6H1h C l3 / 't })
E
EO 584 0FFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION PROJECT IDENTIFICATION SU.S."ARY (PIDS)
TITLE:
O "I
M;M Rc"I"4 CTr\\$
M-LOO 7 FIN:
u
...vy, CONTRACT NUMBER (Non-DOE):
B&R NUMBER:
NRR OPERATING PLAN g
INDEX NO.:
DIVISION BRANCH PROJECT MANAGER:
}, g CONTRACTOR:
Qhp CONTRACT METHOD:
CITY, STATE (Non-DOE):
SMALL BUSINES5/MINGRITY CONTRACT (Non-DD SUB-CONTRACTOR (5):
YES //
NO / /
AMOUNT $_
PROJECTED PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE START.;.
ND:
< Wl i
M 2 30,M h PROJECTED F]NANCIAL DATA (000'.s)
PROJECT TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL FY 19F/4-CARRY f t p5i$.
FY E,r 5*
FY8%
VALUE OB'.1G COSTED OVER BUDG BUDG BUDG Sco o
o o
se e
o APPLICATION (RELATE THE PROJECT-TO A SPECITIC PLANNED ACCOMPLISH".E NRR F9 N O f% m.: W m p nt'&>a fM 9
- VY'
& g g c. k m e4 e. w y % ch d 2 %
g A & ok_ b - A. h e.t mil. go ekki kg w:% % W
.gcq h.oq h &~ %
M r
r..
4 WORK RECUI.iEME::TS (0ESCRIBE '4 HAT ** TO JI ;IX;C;F.ID; TL A% wapxv4.a_oce4%g o% 04%.as u k% % &
g
%n Nbh 3 An[ mcg 4
M f..
MODIFICATIONS (DESCRIBE MAJOR CHANGES TO THE PROJECT) r s*
COMPLETE AS APPLICABLE.
R:comended:
Endorsed:
Endorsed:
Endorsed:
App q ge.
P_ROJECPT'W NAGER SECTIDN LDR BRANCH CHFh*
AS590lR.
_DIV25t'
,l MM NhE MWdhk' FMAkl 7LRt(Insts.is)
}%
s(jng cy 6/;e/o-A
.Le\\t\\
6/#
//d g
i
(
_ Date)
... +
8+
l--
naco
- o
'o,,
UNITED STATES
[
F" NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION o
j f.,i WASHINGTON, D. C. 20$53
/
<g p $M MEMORANDUM FOR: Jesse L. Funches, Director Planning & Pro. gram Analysis Staff FROM:
Darrell G. Eisenhut, Director Division of Licensing
SUBJECT:
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE FUNDING NEEDS FOR NRR, IE, AND REGION IV This memorandum responds to yours of July 24, 1984, on the above subject. The enclosure provides the estimated FY84 funding needs for Comanche Peak, Waterford, and Wolf Creek.
h Darrell Eisenhu, Director Division' of Licensing q
Enclosure:
As stated cc:
T. Ippolito
'D. Cru chfield K. Kniel M. Williana N
D M
b
- O J
7
-,,,n-FY84 ESTIMATED FUNDING'NEEDS "i
AUGUST SEPTEMBER Comanche Peak NRR Contracts (to date - 175K)
FIN A-6819 INEL 100K 100.K.,
B-3077 ETEC 40K 30K A-0802 LLNL 60K 44K A-6821 INEL 60K 40K.
260K 214K
~
IE Contracts
_(to date - 450K)
Parameters 2CK 20K Region IV Contracts (to date - 50K)
~
FIN A-3600 BNL 20K TOTALS TO DATE - 675K NEED 300K 234K Waterford NRR Contracts (to date - 498K)
FIN A-6819 3K A-6821 B-3077 10K IE Contracts (to date - 210K)
Region IV Contracts
~ -
(to date - 60K) total 13K
~
Wolf Creet NRR Contracts IE Contracts Region IV Contracts FIN A-6701 30K TOTAL 30K
-