ML20128D680
| ML20128D680 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 05000000, Seabrook |
| Issue date: | 04/03/1984 |
| From: | Speis T Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19292B772 | List:
|
| References | |
| CON-FIN-A-3754-4, FOIA-84-624 NUDOCS 8505290164 | |
| Download: ML20128D680 (3) | |
Text
.
' s._
NRC soRu 173 u s. nucle aR REGULATORY COMMis$ SON ORDtRNuvetR 2 7si 7f 20-84-304-N.
QATE STANDARD ORDER FOR DOE WORK
, - A?P 3 g.
e ISSUED TO: (DOE Of fical ISSUED BY: (NRC Of fke)
ACCOUNTING CITATION O
ce r Reactor
. San Francisco Operations.0ffice g l ti n 31X02 0.2 4 e4R NvveEn PERFORMING ORG ANIZATION AND LOCATION 20 19-40 41-5 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Livermore, Califor'nia A-3754-4 WORK PERICO. THIS ORDER I"ede' Eof ~SeabrookNuclearPower~ Plant
[o',[ U I '*l*' N 1a Probabilistic Risk Analysis 3/30/84 11/30/84 9I OBLIG ATION AVAILABILITY PROVIDED BY:
~
~
~
f-.
-A.
THIS ORDER "
$75,000 0.
TOTA >. OF ORDERS PLACED PRIOR TO THis OATE WITH THE PERFORMING ORGANIZATION
+
W*ad"NMi^"$2cifE"'EATl N SwsOL" AND THE FIRST FOUR DIGITS OF_mE
$1,638,000 S
C. TOTAL ORDERS TO DITE.
- (TOTAL A & si
$1,713,000 D. AMOUNT tNCLUDED IN "C" APPLICA8LE TO THE " FIN NUMBER" CITED IN TH66.OR DER.
575,000 --
L:
FLNANCI AI. FLEXISlLITY:
Q rUNDS WILL NOT BE REPROGRAMMED BETWEEN FINS. LINE D CONSTITUTES A L MITATION ON OBLIGATIONS AUTHORIZED.,
O Fuses MAY BE REPROGR AMMED NOT TO EXCEED 210% OF FIN LEVEL UP TO $50K. LINE C CONSTITUTES A LIMITATION ~
4
ON 08 LIGATIONS AUTHORIZED.
STANDARD TERMS AND CONDITIONS PROVIDED DOE ARE CONSIDERED PART QF THIS ORDER UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.
ATTACHMENTS:'
THE FOLLOWING ATTACHMENTS ARE HERE5Y SECURITY.
' MADE A PART OF.THIS ORDER:
@ WORK ON THis ORDER IS NOT CLAS$1FIED.
QSTATEMENT O F WOR K -.-
O WORK ON THtS ORDER INvotvES ctASSiFiED
[.'
C ADDITIONAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS INFORM ATION. NRC FORM 187 85 ATTACHED.
%XOTHEa Proposal ConteInt
- 1 cEu ARKS
- -
~
l iThis order provides incremental funds for initiation of work on the attached
'F Statement of Work that must be urgently begun and requests a proposal be submitted
[ within 40 days to Ms. J. Veillette, NRR/ DST with a copy provided to T. DiGaloma,
,[NRR/FPAS.
j
.After acceptance,'please send to the Office of Resource Management, ATTN: D. Dandois, end provide'a copy to the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, ATTN: X. McGrath.
/ T 67 MSUING AMTHORITY ACCEPTING ORGANIZATION l
d ;" d M/d i,(/ 4 Y pyJ4 g g l
5'cN^' vat
. XTra n s P. Soeis. Director i
] o t.
a nroc
- Division of Safety Technology /NRR catt NRCSCnM 173 (2-781' f*fd5~Ee
7
~ ['. E O 1 1553
.f
.:Upcin; items are requirsi :: prepare DOE pr:posals (NRC Fom 189):
3r:ie:t Ti:Is ~- The title shculd-be a unicue identifier of-the project reflecting a
- e.erai ices-of the encer;assed work.
In'rcst cases, the title en the NRC Statement f
-:r.< MCrt) _sr.:uid be -used. '
~
~
Cete cf Prc:: sal - Self_ explanatory; include revisien number when applicable.
NF.C Office - Indicate the NRC Office (s) supporting or recuesting the work.
-FIN Number and 2&R Number - Indicate NRC's FIN Number and B&R Number, as provided en the 5;atem2nt of Work.
DOE Centractor,-. Performing organization's name.
Site Indicate location (s) of organization that will-perform the work.
Contractor Acccunt and DOE B&R Number - Provide the infomation for the highest level
' fe::sible.
- Cocnizant Personnel - NRC Project' Manager and other NRC Technical Staff, if applicable; DO Project Manager; and, the performing organization's key personnel: Project Manager and principal' investigator (s); and, FTS phone _ numbers for each; include resumes for contracter scrsennel.
Period of Perfomance - Provide-proposed date of commencement of work and best-estimated ccmplation date of"the project.
Staff-Years of Effort and Costs
. Estimate costs' to be incurred by DOE contractors and su contractors. Jor consultants, provide the cost of the services on a per staff-year of '
Technical Support basis.
This shall include direct salary, indirect expenses and other T reimbursable. amounts; the cost shall also be stated on a per-day basis.
c
"^
!.ist.by. fiscal yeai from start to ccmpletion of the project (FIN): Cost estimate will be
- consistent with DOE Manual 2200, the Pricing Manual, and shown in thousands-of dollars.
Staff-years:of Effort (t.aboratory personnel only):
Direct Scientific / Technical Other Direct (Graded).
Costs:
~
~
Direct Salaries (FTE's)
Indirect Labor Costs Material and Services (Excl. ADP) 1/
AD? Suoport.
Other (specify)
Generai and Admin. Expense (
Total Operating Ccst
--%)
'. Sub 05 tracts Travel Expens.e
- Capital Equip.
(FIN charged (_)
o Domestic Total Project Cost o Foreign
" nthly Corecast Excense - Provide the planned monthly rate of costs for first year.
If not
<r.cwn. a: t me of proposal submittal, this may be provided in the first monthly business letter report once the project is authorized At the beginning of each subsecuent year,
-i.clude-the planned monthly rate of costs
'e ensuing year in the first monthly business istter report.
F: recast Milestone Chart - Complete as shown on NRC Fom 129.
A::reval Authority - Proposal must be signed b'y an appropriat,e laboratory or field 1: ivi;y-recresentative.
Note:
This individual pay or r.ay not be the sare person who
- igns the_trar.smittal letter.
- l J,- u w
.. a a.- c enjaa naceefes} e n
Trffec.tescri:-ior - provice narrativo descri;tions of the fo'lluinc topic's in.the crder
. listec on plain pap 9 attached :c-tho_ NRC Fo-129. 'If an item is nct applicable, sc
- W e _en the W.C Form IE9.
-~
s 1.
- fec:ive cf procesed Work
. 5acv.crounc - Provice a-.brief summary of,the. tech'nical problem, issue, or need so as a.
to crient the reader to-the requirements for the work or end project.
~
b.
Ob.iective - St:te concisely the performing crganization's understanding of the cbjective(s), i.e., what will be the end resuit(s).
< 2. -
Su:. mary of Prior Efforts - Not applicable for NRR projects.
'3.
a.
Work Recuirements - Dascribe the tasks and subtasks to be performed in such a manner that a disinterested third party can understand what is to be done and how it will be accomplished for the level of effort and period of performance proposed.
Describe any assumotions being made pertinent to performing the work.
Provide criteria or otner cases upon which evaluations, judgment or other action will be taken.
Describe potential problems and recommand solutions. State and describe separately any options being proposed that require NRC approval before 4
proceeding.
b.
.Meetines and Travel - S. tate the number of trips that the performing organ-
. ization will require to perform the work and identify where and how many p,eople are expected to travel.
If no travel is expected or required, state none.
Describe any foreign travel requirements; approval must be obtained, by processing z NRC Form 445.
. NRC Furnished Material
. Specify any equipment (includino ADP), background reports -
c.
.or. data..or otDer. specific materials requiretto be provided by fdC, or equipment -
be purchased.
4.
Cescriotion of Any Follow-On Efforts - Not applicable for NRR projects.
.5.
Relationship to Other Projects - Identify related projects that either (1) generate information that will be neeced to accomplish the work proposed under this project cr (2) will use information generated by this profect, and (3) support a comon cbjective.
If none, so state on the NRC.Fom 189"'
6.
Recortino Recuirements - State: the number, type, and other content. of the reports requested or~ proposed to be provided, to whom and'when they are to be submitted, and, if' requested by NRC, whether drafts will be provided prior to finalization.
7.
Subcontractor Information - Identify the subcontractor or censultant and describe any effort that will be performed by a subcontractor or consultant, and reference the task or. subtask described under the work requirements that the subcontract:r or consultant effort will support.
Any work performed by the subcontractor on be",alf cf the nuclear industry that might give ri.se to an apparent er actual conflict of interest must be descriced.
If the subcentractor is not kn:wn at the time the proposal is being submitted, so indicate and describe status and expected time frame for selection of the subcontractor (s) or consultant (s).
3.~
New Cacital Ecuicment Recuired - List all capital equip. ent which must be purchased by na performing organization to perform the work described and prcvide the estimated ces 9.
5:ecial Facilities Recuired - Describe any new special facilities required.
10.
C:nflict of Interest Infor ation - Describe any significant contractual and crgan-i::: cnal reia icnsni;s of :ne C'OE and its cc::ractor en this prcposal.with industries regulated by the NRC (e.g., utilities, etc.) and su;piiers thereof (e.g.,
a':Fi:sc: engineers ~and rsactor manufacturers, etc.) that -i;ht give rise tc an a: parer.t er actual conflict cf interest.
i
m s
c STATEMENT OF WORK
Title:
Review of the Probabilistic Risk Assessment for the Seabrook Nuclear Power Plant-FIN No.:
A-3754 A S CI B&R No.:
20-19-40-41-5 Program Manager:
Sarah M. Davis (FTS 492-7546)
BACKGROUND:
a The Reliabil.ity and Risk Assessment Branch (RRAB) within the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation *(NRR) has the responsibility of reviewing Piobabilistic Risk Assessments (PRAs) sub'mitted to NRC by license applicants and licensees.
A PRA has been submitted to.NRC.by
-Public. Service Company of New Hampshire, an operating license applicant, pertaining to'the Seabrook Nuclear Power Plant.
The study is expected to be
-a detailed and thorough analysis qubmitted to the NRC_in Februa~ry 1984.
gpe.
OBdECTIVE The objective of the present task is to review those aspects of the Seabrook PRA leadirig' to the estimates of the frequencies of each plant damage state to determine.the accuracy of these estimates.
-WORK REQUIREMENTS Perform a comprehensive, quantitative review and evaluation of-the risk assess-ment being' submitted by the licensee for the Seabrook PWR power plant to determine if the estimates of the frequencies of_the plant damage states reflect appropriate use of-risk assessment. methods, plant / site information, and reli-ability data.
The.defensibil'ityofthelicensee'ssubmitthiof_thefrhuenciesofplantdamage
_ states. and the ' associated uncertainty spread with respect.to (1) use of state-of-the-art risk assessment methods, (2) thoroughness and comprehensiveness of analysi,s, (3) availability and appropriate use of data, and (4) realism of modeling assumptions will be evaluated.
The impact.of deficiencies or understated uncer-tainties in the licensee's analysis of sequences will be displayed.
The review will cover.all aspects of the study up to the point of the calculation
-of the frequencies of the plant damage states, including methodology, assumptions, data,-information sources, models, plant understanding, completeness of the analysis, and any other area where inconsistencies may arise which could affect
_the quantitative or qualitative results.
A sensitivity analysis will take
' alternatives identified in the review in appropriate combinations and determine 5
n MGo 3 sol
ec,
- .1
~
~
theLincremental change resulting'from'the use of alternatives:in the. dominant Lsequences corresponding to each plant-damage state. ?In general,Lthese; alternatives
- sheuld be evaluated by performing localized calculations within the analysis.
For 1g l example, inconsistencies identified in the event trees'should be reevaluated to' determine how alternative approaches ~ would impact the sequence p' ob' abilities.
r LTask 1 = Internal Events Evaluation Estimated level' of effort:
1/2 staff years c.
Estimated completion date:
5 months.after receiving PRA
'(a) ReviewLand -evaluate the scope, assumptions, and systems analysis for internal J
. events.
Review for1 completeness.the initiating events in the PRA including ~
" both the following events and combinations of. initiating events with
~
i
'r' Esubsequent failures:
1.
Station blackout (loss of offsite and emergency ac power)
. a)'
Reactor Coolant Pump.(RCP) seal failure (after station
. blackout) b)
loss of 'dc after. finite time, due 'to battery depletion 1
- '(af ter station blackout), or-immediate loss of DC-because of, prior undetected battery-failure (after loss of offsite power).
~
2.
Loss of de power 3.
Loss of. instrument and control power Multiple instrument tube LOCA below core level 4.
5.
Overcooling events - (Pressurized thermal shock)
~
~
6.
Steam fenerator tube failure, including subsequent stuck-open secondary side safety relief valve.
7.
.ATWS 8.
Stuck open S/R valve 9.
. Loss of main feedwater
~
10.
Containment isolation failure 11.
Turbine-trip 12.
Loss of component cooling water 1
13.
Loss of service water N.
2 u
3
,1 14.'
Loss of ventilation _in auxiliary bui,lding, 15.
Pipe breaks in auxiliary building
- 16.
Reactor coolant' pump' seal failure (as contribution to-small~LOCA initiator)
~17.
Boron dilution
- 18. ' Excess feedwater events, including ~their possible.
1 contribution to loss of main feedwater' nf, 19.
Loss of instrument and control air
~ Assess'the c'ompleteness.and treatment of transients /LOCA initiating events-
~"
-which alsoJdegrade mitigating systems.
/(b)~'_ Develop a-table of a'ssumptions used in the analysis and make a finding on the
- validity. -These assumptions include.such considerations as pump operabilities-
"with insufficient cooling or net positive: suction pressure operability of
. _compon_e'nts in_ degraded environments,.minimupy;omponents needed tq sustain a
_ function, and availability of equipment _ baset.on technical specifications
'(c) Review the.' event trees for completeness and validity, and identify all~
- ~
'M
~ functional and support system interdependencies:that~were considered or should be considered'in the evaluation. This_should. include coupling with the jnitiating event.. Evaluate the significance of. areas which are incomplete.
Review,the stated and implicit assumptions associated with success paths in the e' vent trees (e.g., feed and bleed).
Review the' event tree' logic, and assess.the validity of assignment of combinations'of. successes and failures of_ systems to the plant damage states (system success' criteria). -Consider system dependencies arising from interactions.related to the physical
^ phenomena;. identify and evaluate any omissions.
Compare system success criteria to those used in other PRAs for similar systems under_similar circumstances. Assess the validity of the treatment of transient-induced loss' of coolant. accidents, and other such transfers'from 'one type of event tree to another.
'(dl _Revi,ew the fault trees' to' determine their accuracy, validity, and completeness
.in quantifying the high risk sequences.
Of particular interest are the definition of the top events in fault
- trees, test and maintenance unavailabilities, i
consistency _of fault trees with system success criteria, common cause interactions, 3
w
+v v
me--~'--'
.. j g
I
.+-
- human errors -(cognitive, procedural, latent, dynamic)
" design errors.
J consequential: failures-(coupled to. initiating event),
- ~
~ failure rate data and uncertainties, completeness of fault trees.
Identify the dependency of front-line systems on support systems, and the
. dependency of. support systems on other support systems. _ Perform this dependency
-f'
- analysis on a train-to-train basis - e.g., which trains of a given front-line system' depend on.which trains of_a support system. _ Display the results in the fo'rm.of a~ dependency table ~or. diagram.
Identify and. evaluate any omissions in
- the PRA.
'(e) Determine whether the limit of resolution in the fault tree analysis is-
, adequate' for.the' identification of common mode failures.
Determine the adequacy lof the identification and qualitative analysis of common mode
-failures and-systems interactions including-6he treatment of common mode
. failures arising' from hard-wired. couplingr. spatial / environmental coupling, coupled human errors; design errors and inadequate testing resulting in the failure to re' cognize that a system may respond successfully during a test
-but not'during a.true demand.
Develop a table of common cause considerations and compare quantification in this PRA_with previous PRAs.
(f) Assess the completeness, accuracy, and adequ5cy of the conditional probabilities for_some system's success / failure given another system's previous-success / failure.
T(g) Determine:the. sources of data used for quantification of the fault trees,
- and compare them~lo data sources used in other PRAs.
Highlight data used in quantifying trees if the data deviate significantly from data previously-used in other PRAs.
Particular interest should be.. accorded recovery or repair rates 'and failure rates. ' Exami~ne the validity of the method of combining generic data with' plant specific data.
(h)' Identify all known omissions and deficiencies in the systems analysis including support system dependencies and estimate the impact where possible.
~
Include the technical basis for these estimates.
-(i)
Incorporate NRR' technical review comments as provided (success / failure criteria, environmental qualifications, etc. )
(j)- Review LERs and other pertinent documents on operating experience, and discuss any significant events which are applicable to Seabr:ot.
Include such examples as:
t
~
i; 6
environmental-conditions of the location,.
~*
how NUREG/CR-2497, " Precursors to Potential Sa~ vere Core Damage
-Accidents:
1969-1979, A_. Status Report" relates to the plant and its risk a'ialysis, how' the recent failure.of scram breakers to operate satisfactorily'
_ at the -Salem plant relates to Seabrook and its-risk analysis, the con'ditional probability that " containment fails to-isolate on demand" (provide a basis'for this value).
-(k)' Assess the' validity of the. treatment of: human errors, both those occurring
-after an accident (dynamic) and prior _to an accident (latent, e.g., test and.
maintenance errors).
Assess the completeness and treatment of cognitive errors.
n Develop a_ human error-table of significant actions showing time frame and locatio,n for action, availability of procedures, manpower requirements.and f
HEP, and compare with HEP from other PRAs.
- (1) Assess the analytical modeling and quantification.of accident sequer.ces.
(m) Audit the. sequence frequency calculations corresponding to each plant damage
-state to asce'rtain accuracy, uncertainty,Jcompleteness, and adequacy. Where
.the reviewers..and the PRA authors disagree ia-a significant way (e.g.,
' assumptions,-failure rates, success cr.iteria tomissions), the reviewers will r
recalculate the sequence frequencies to establish thei'r sensitivity.
(n) Compate the dominant sequences corresponding to each plant damage' state to existing PWR PRAs, generic data, and operating experience to help assure that.no significant' sequences are omitted.
(o) Assess _the' uncertainty analysis.
Examine propagation and completeness in
< treatment of uncertainty, data uncertainty, and modeling sensitivity / uncertainty.
Task 2 External Events' Evaluation Estimated level of effort:
0.8 staff years Estimated completion date:
5monthsafterreceivingPpA
. (a). For each type of external event considered, concur with or modify the -
estimated hazard curves, assess the completeness of the sequences considered
-for'each plant damage state, assess the treatment of common cause interactions cand human errore, and evaluate the fra components ident1 Tied by the appropria'gility r,r failure estimates of the te event / fault trees.
- (b) _ Review the event and fault trees to determine their accuracy, validity, and completeness for external events.
Review and evaluate the implicit and explicit assumptions of the external events analysis.
(c) : Identify all known omissio'ns and deficiencies in the external event analysis, and estimate the impact where possible.
For those omissions and deficiencies for which evaluation is believed to be beyond the state-of-the-art, provide a list and the basis for this belief.
5 1.
7;
= -
c.D L(d) LAudit the[ sequence 1 frequency calculations corresponding to each plant damage
~
state to' ascertain = accuracy, uncertainty, completeness,'and ade'quacy.
Where the reviewers and_ the PRA authors disagree in a significant way (e.g., assumptions.
failure rates, success criteria, omission), the reviewers will recalculate the sequence;fre'quencies to establish their sensitivity.
(e)' Assess the uncertainty analysis. _ Examine propagation and completeness in-treatment of uncertainty, data uncertainty, and.modeling sensitivity /
. urn:e rtainty.
-Task 3= Oraft Final Report on Tasks 1 and 2 M
~
Estimated. level of effort:
0.5 staff years
-Estimated completion;date:
5 months.after receiving PRA t-
~(a) For -each of the PRA areas (e.g., initiating events, initiating event frequencies, component-failure. rates,< common cause failures, human reliability
. analysis,, ~ test and maintenance, event trees, fault trees, -success / failure criteria, ekternal events, quantification,- and uncertainties) define the-basis.for acceptability and describe what was considered in the review.
L
_The-findings will include reestimates,,as 1ppFopriate,.of the dominanti sequence' frequencies corresponding tot each plant damage state, identifi- "
cation'of areas that.were not pursued, and identification of grey areas where' sensitivity. studies might be used.o bound a_ central estimate.
(b) Describe areas of incompleteness (all known_ omissions and deficiencies) determined in the review.
Quantify, where possible, the potential impact of these areas.
Discuss the basis for. quantification, values.
.. Based,on reviewer audits, discuss the accuracy, uncertainty, and adequacy.
'(c) o,f the PRA author,'s sequence quantifications.
(d) An approximate outline of the report is given here.
,~
e b
e e
6
1.
. Executive Summary 2.
Introduction
2.1 Background
2.2 Scope 2.3 Assumptions 3.
Internal Events Analysis
- 3.1 Initiating Events 3.2 Event Trees LOCA
^
Transient Other 3.3 -Success Criteria-3.4 Systems
~~
Descriptions.
Fault Tree Models 3.5 ~ Human Factors
- 3. 6 Failure Data 3.7 Operating Experience Analysis 3.8 Analys-is Codes
.' 3. 9 Accident Sequences
-- '=
3.10 Dependencies
. 3.11 Quantification 4.
-External. Event Analysis-4.1 Seismic 4.2 Fire 4.3 Industrial Accidents.
'4.4 Other 5.
Summary and' Conclusions 5.1 Domina6t Seg'uences Corresponding to Each Plant Damage State 5.2--Impo.rtant Problems and Omissions 5.3 Treatment of Uncertaint'ies "
~
5.4 Overall
Evaluation of Seabrook Risk ~ Assessment 6
Appendices (as required)
~
. Task 4 Final Report Estimated level of effort:
0.25 staff years
-Estimated completion date:
9 months after receiving PRA The final. report will take into account' pertinent comments on the draft final
' report by HRC and other interested parties.
It will be published as a NUREG/CR.
l l
7 L.
.;(,,
~
a-F Task 5
. Questions to Licensee
-Estimated level'of effort:
0.1 staff years Estimated completion date:
3 months from initiation of work
~ Provide' ques'tions f'or forwarding to the licensee covering all aspects of the
- systems analysis.
(Responses may have already been received informally).
LEVEL OF-EFFORT AND' PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE-
['
"The _ estimated level of effort is 2.85 professional staff years over an eight month period.
MEETINGS-AND TRAVEL The' contractor'may attehd a 2-day visit at an unspecified site with the licensee to discuss questions on his analysis.
and may attend six 1-day meetings at NRC headquarters in Washington DC for four participants.
Ecur individuals may conduct two three-day visits to the
' Seabrook site to look for potential common cause vulnerabilities, review of control operations, and a general overview of the plant layout and potential idiosyncrascies.
^'
[
NRC FURNISHED MATERIALS
. The. risk study will be transmitted when available#. 'Please specify the number of copies needed.
NRC will provide the plant FSAR with questions and answer's. Additional information will be transmitted on request.
REPORTING REQUIREMENTS l
. Technical Reporting
~
i Upon comple. tion of Task 3, the contractor will formally's'ubmit a draft final report covering Tasks 1, 2, and 3 as defined in Task 3.
Upo1 completion of Task 4, the contractor will submit the final report which takes into account industry and NRC comments.
~
Upon completion of Task 5, the contractor will submit questions for forwarding to the licensee.
i t
8
3 L Yi 1
.!'enthlv Business Letter Reoort:
!A monthly business letter will' be submitted by the 15th of the month to the NRR
. Project Manager with copies to the Director, Division of Safety. Technology, ATTN:
.J. Veillette; A. Thadani,' DST; Ronald Frahm, OST; and L. Solander, NRR.
These reports-will-identifyJ.the' title of the project, the FIN, the-Principal
~
Investigator, the period of. performance, and the reporting period and will
-contain 3 sections as follows:
Proiect' Status Section 1.~
A' listing of the efforts completed during the period; milestones 41 reached, o'r if missed, an explanation provided.
2(
Any problems -or-delays" encountered-or anticipated and recommendations
-for. resolution. 1/
3.
A summary. of-progress to date (this may be expressed in terms of _
percentage completion for the project).
4.,
Plans ~for the next reporting period.
Financial Status Sect' ion.
~
Providethetota19 cost (value)oftheprojectasreflectedinthe 1.
proposal and the total amount of funds obligaled to date, and the balance of funds' required to-complete the work by~ fiscal year as follows:
Total Funds Balance of Funds Projected Obligated By Fiscal Year Projected Cost-To Date FY-FY-FY-
'2.
P'rovide the total" direct staff use and amount of; funds expended (costed) during the period and total cumulative to date in the-following. categories:
.e '
1/L If the recommehded resolution involves a Work Order modification, i.e.,
change in work requirements, level of effort (costs) or period of parformance, a separate letter should be prepared and submitted to the Director, Division of Safety Technology, ATTN: Jayne Veillette, andJ a copy provided to the NRR Project Manager and L. Solander, NRR.
p E
c.
f
[-
n 9:
".K
- . 6 Period Cumulative
'a.'
Direct Lab Staff Effort b.
Funds (S000)
Direct Salaries.
Materials and Services (Excluding ADP)
.ADP Support Subcontracts.
-Travel Expenses
. Indirect Labor Costs ~
S,f. -
Other (Specify)
General and Administrative
~ %) 2/-
(
Total
(
-Fee Recovery Cost Status Section
-Pursuant.to the provisions of NRC Regulations, 10 CFR 170, provide the total amount of funds expended.(costed) during 'he period and cumulative t'o date t
for 'Rrojects.2 and 3 by facility (work assignments}, and repo.-t them on a separate Ease.as part of this report in the fo14ow4no format:
FIN:
A-3754 TITLE: Review of the Probabilistic. Risk Assessment-for the Seabrook Nuclear Power Plant PERIOD:
Docket
- Costs Facility Name Number Period Cumulative Seabrook
~50-443 Common Costs 3/ 900 2/
Provide percentage against total funds oblicated to date.
3/.
Common costs are for those costs incurred for effort such ~as preparatory or start-up 'ef forts to interpret.and reach agreement on methodology, approsch, acceptance criteria, regulatory position, or TER" format; efforts associated with the " lead
. plant" concept.that might be involved during the first one or two plant' reviews'as estimated by the contractor; meetings / discussions involving the above efforts to provide orientation, background knowledge, or guidance at the beginning or during.
~
performance of work; and any technical ^ effort applied to a category of facilities,
-e.g.,
reactor analyses on'all BWR facilities.
In the case of the latter example, these costs should be prorated' equally to only those facilities to which the effort 6ppiiss.
Development.of methodologies, criteria, or technical positions are not fee-recoverable and therefore,'should not be categorized as' common costs. Managemen anc related tur;0rt costs ' chargeable directly to the ef fort are not to be reporte.1 as cer.cn costs 4r.d should,-therefore,-be charged.in proportion.to the other direct casts associated
..el P. these facilitics during the reporting period.
10 o
i
, b.z
.-'O
.+
E^
~,
Common costs are to be accrued on a monthly basis and prorated flote: :
- equally among the facilities identified under the effort at the end
.of each fiscal year.or-at the completion of ~the effort, whichever.
- occurs first.
- (
t 9
9 O'
e 9
6 er O
4 e...
. m ear.
4
\\
k'4 e
9 b
esp 9
,e N
- W D
6 e
9 t
D I
11 P
V dW9 1
- fr#