ML20138C194
| ML20138C194 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Waterford, Comanche Peak, 05000000 |
| Issue date: | 08/15/1985 |
| From: | Barnes B, Nalezny C, Obenchain C, Whittemore J EG&G IDAHO, INC. |
| To: | Crutchfield D, Donohew J, Lazo L Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20136F578 | List:
|
| References | |
| CON-FIN-A-6819, FOIA-84-751 NUDOCS 8510220252 | |
| Download: ML20138C194 (9) | |
Text
.
Uls1 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Date of Proposal -
unc ponu iss' [' %N.
Pm August 1984 gh
! PROJECT AND BUDGET PROPOSAL FOR NRC WORK O New ~
E Revision No. 1 FIN-' A6819 EVALVATION OF SELECTED NRC OPEN ITEMS BEFORE PLANT FUEL LOAD NRC D&R Number Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR), Olvision Of Licensing (DL) 20 19 40 41 1 DOE Contractor Contractor Account EG&G Idaho, Inc. Number g_gg4 8
IDAHO NATIONAL ENGINEERING LABORATORY (INEL) 40 10 0 020 COGNLZANT PERSONNEL ORGANIZATION FTS PHONE NUMBER PERFORMANCE NaC Protect Manager Starting Date J. N. Donohew NRC/NRR 492-7230 04/20/84 Other NRC Technical Statt 492-7791 Compieuon Date L. M. Lazo/D. M. Crutchfield NRC/r4RR 492-7403 11/30/84 DOE Project Manager P. E. Litteneker DOE-ID 583-1301 ye Contractor-Protect Manager 583-9696 C. F. Obenchain/B. L. Barnes EG&G Idaho 583-6355 s Prmespal Investigator (s) 583-6015 J. E. Whittemore/C. L. Nalezny EG8G- Idaho 583-0138 <
STAFF YEARS OF EFFORT tRound to nearest tenth of a yean FY -1984 FY -1985 FY -1986 FY -1987 FY -1988 Direct ScientifH:/ Technic *'
3.7 0.6 l ciner Direct <Graoem 0.0 0.0 TOTAL DIRECT STAFF YEARS 3.7 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 COST PROPOSAL ($000)
Detect Salaries l
Material and Services IEscluding ADP) ;
ADP Support f
Subcontracts !
Tuvel Expenses DomestsC Indirect Labor Costs Common Support 8510220252 851016 PDR FOIA Otner (Specif y) gearryo,en CARDE84-751 PDR Other (Specif y)
General and Acministrative ( 16.0 v.)
TOTAL OPERATING COST 632 0 0 0 0 Capital Equipment 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL PROJECT COST 632 0 0 0 0 I q 39 84 MONTHLY FORECAST October November December January February March EXPENSE O O O O O O Apfel May June July August September
- [' Total Forecast Expense s 560K 92 42m 25 52 149 200 APPROVAL AUTHORITY-SIGNATURE oate ---
aacroa= =
- The total shown is ~an estirrate.
Ine actual amount wiki proDa)iy De Page i different and may impact the total cost to complete this project.
- l i
- t ,
mac romu see U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION n u<a FIN: A6819 i<
t
- A PROJECT AND BUDGET PROPOSAL FOR NRC WORK o.t.
August 1984 1 Project Title EVALUATION OF SELECTED NRC OPEN ITEMS BEFORE PLANT FUEL LOAD DOE Proposing Organization IDAHO OPERATIONS OFFICE (ID)
FORECAST MILESTONE CHART: Scheduled to Start W - Completed (Shown in Quarter Ye.r)
PROVIDE ESTIMATED DOLLAR COST FOR EACH TASK FOR EACH FISCAL YEAR TASK FY-1984 FY-1985 FY.[g86 FY.1987 FY-1988 istl2nol arol 4:n istl2nolsral4tn isil2noj aro I 4tn ist12nol3rolain ist l2not arol 4:n Project 1--Items A Seneeui.
M through E plus Final Report Cost 180K Project 2--Items A Seneouie M
through E plus Final Report Cost 3dOK 72K ECDedult Cost Senecule C.os t N
Senecule cost Senecule Cost Senedule Cost Senecule Cost Senedule Cost Senecule Cost SusioTAL 560K 72K OK OK OK CARRYOVER 72K (72K) OK OK OK TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST 632K OK OK OK OK mac Fomu see 2 l taev 0443 Page
w l
- l isac Ponas tas U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION c= man RNi A6819
, PROJECT AND BUDGET PROPOSAL FOR NRC WORK o,i, August 1984 roject Title EVALUATION OF SELECTED NRC OPEN ITEMS BEFORE PLANT FUEL LOAD DOE Proposmg OrganMon IDAHO OPERATIONS OFFICE (ID)
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:(Provide narrative dsscriptions of the required topics in numerical order, if an item is not apphcable, list title and so state.)
(1) WORK REQUIREMENTS Backgrnund Information Waterford:
Construction of the Waterford Unit 3 facility is nearing completion. There remain a number of issues that need to be evaluated before the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff can mak? Its low power licensing decision for Waterford 3. These issues include the quality control allegations discussed in Project I and how the applicant has met the NRC requirements in General Inspection Manual Chapter 2513, General inspection Manual Chapter 2514, General Inspection Manual Chapter 2512, inspection and Enforcement (IE)Bulletin 79-14 and Independent Design Verification Program.
Comanche Peak:
[V , Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station is in the final stages of the operating license review process. The Construction Permits for Unit 1 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 Reports (SER) was issued on July 14, 1981. Because of the large number of outstanding issues identified in the SER, the staff recommended delaying the Advisory Comittee on Reactor Safety (ACRS) Review. SEP. Supplement No. I was issued on October 16, 1981, and the ACRS meeting was held on November 13, 1981. The ACRS, by letter dated November 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 hearing for over two years. All l but one contention has been dismissed. The remaining contention questions the ability of the applicant's Quality Assurance / Quality Control (QA/QC) Program to prevent deficiencies in the design and construction of the plant. The Licensing tioard has admitted many allegations of design and construction deficiencies into j , the hearing as relevant to this contention.
l Applicants are currently projecting a fuel load date for Unit I to be in late l Septemoer 1984. The number of hearing issues and the timing of evaluating these issues may impact this date.
hac pones see Page 3 me 0844
~
aac g es u.s. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g gggg
- PROJECT AND BUDGET PROPOSAL FOR NRC WORK o,Rugust 1984 rotect Title EVALUATION OF SELECTED NRC OPEN ITEMS BEFORE PLANT FUEL LOAD DOE Proposing Organization IDAHO OPERATIONS OFFICE (ID)
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:(Provide narrative descnotions of the required topics in nurnoncal order. If an item is not applicable, list tstle and so state.)
(1) WORX REQUIREMENTS (Continued)
Procram Objective The objective of this effort is for EG&G Idaho ~ personnel to:
A. Assist the NRC in determining whether the application for Waterford Unit 3 has met the NRC requirements in selected parts of NRC General Inspection Procedures Manual Cnapters 2512, 2513, and 2514; in the IE Bulletin 79-14 and in the Independent Design Verification Program (IDVP).
B. Assist the NRC in determining whether the alleged improper practices during the construction at Comanche Peak are valid and whether any departures from proper practice are significant to the safety of the plant and have generic implications concerning other quality control practices or other safety systems at the plant and in determining whether there is proper implementation 9f the applicant's and vendor's quality assurance programs at the plant site.
Procram Work Requirements Project 1: Waterford 3 Quality Control Allegations A. EG&G Idaho will have a team composed of a team leader and team members and decide upon a plan for performing the evaluation required in Task C below.
The plan will be presented to the NRC Lead Engineer at the site for his approval.
B. EG&G Idaho team members will provide assistance to the NRC Inquiry Team and Quality Assurance (QA) Paperwork Document Review Team at the plant site.
The EG&G Idaho team will interface with the NRC teams through the EG&G Idaho team leader.
C. By a review of the QA/QC documentation and associated information, and interviews with appropriate personnel, the EG&G Idaho team members will:
- 1. Review the implementation of the licensee's quality assurance program (including vendor programs) and provide a technical assessment regarding program implementation, l
l aae ronu , 4 (Re. 0684 Page
[ ..
w senc Pons see U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION P. m g A6819
- l. PROJECT AND BUDGET PROPOSAL FOR NRC WORK o.ie August 1984
@t Title EVALUATION OF SELECTED NRC OPEN ITEMS BEFORE PLANT FUEL LOAD DOE Proposing Organization IDAHO OPERATIONS OFFICE (10)
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:(Provide narrative descript6ons of the required topics in numencal order. If an item is not apphcable, list title and so state.)
(1) WORK REQUIREMENTS (Continued)
Procram Work Requirements (Continued)
- 2. Based on their review of program implementation and additional reviews regarding specific allegations, provide a technical assessment of allegations concerning improper QA/QC practices at the facility.
Specifically, EG&G Idaho team members will provide their assessment of the safety significance of the reviewed allegations and the potential generic implementations of the allegations.
D. EG&G Idaho's team leader will report daily to the NRC Lead Engineer on the progress and status of the program.
E. The EG&G Idaho team leader will report his findings daily to the NRC Inquiry Team and QA Paperwork Document Review Team leaders, Mr. Peranich and G._ Harrison, respectively.
4 Project 2: Resolution of Comanche Peak Allegations Steps A through E for Project I above are applicable to Project 2 as well, except that Messers. D. Hunnicutt and T. Ipollito, or other NRC personnel acting on their behalf, are to be substituted for those named in step E. In addition, Project 2 provides for assembling a task team to investigate and form an opinion regarding allegations of intimidation of inspection personnel on the part of management at the Comanche Peak power plant. This task team will consist of a team leader from EG&G Idaho and several additional team members as subcontract to EG&G Idaho. EG&G Idaho will submit a report documenting the findings of the task team in mid-August. Task team members will be available for possible testimony at Atomic Safety & Licensing Board hearings during the week of August 27. A final Technical Evaluation Report (TER) on the intimidation allegations will be submitted to the NRC at a later date, following receipt of NRC review comments on the August report.
Assessment and Evaluation Criteria The criteria below are applicable to Projects 1 and 2.
A. The licensee's applicable quality control procedures at the plant site.
ac roa" '" 5 (a v. osaa Page i
senc ponna see U.S. NUCt. EAR REGULATORY COMMISSION FIN e o*e= A6819 PROJECT AND BUDGET PROPOSAL FOR NRC WORK oote August 1984
- 'roject Title EVALUATION OF SELECTED NRC OPEN ITEMS BEFORE PLANT FUEL LOAD DOE Proposing Organuate IDAHO OPERATIONS OFFICE (ID)
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:(Provide narrative descriptions of the required topics 6n numer6 cal order, if an item is not apphcable, ilst title and so state.)
(1) WORK RE0UIREMENTS (Continued)
Assessment and Evaluation Criteria (Continued)
- 8. The applicant's approved QA/QC plan.
C. Applicable industry standards.
D. Direction from the NRC Lead Engineer.
E. Worksheet for review of allegations.
F. General Inspection Manual, Chapters 2512, 2513, and 2514.
G. IE Bulletin 79-14 and the IDVD.
Qualifying Assumptions
., The uncompensated violation of one or more of the following qualifying assumptiont ay impact the program cost or schedule.
A. All work covered herein is expected to be completed on a " level of effort" basis; to provide an accurate cost estimate to help resolve in excess of 300 allegations for each of the 2 projects without having first seen the allegations precludes making an accurate cost estimate to complete the entire task.
- 8. EG&G Idaho will make every effort to supply personnel with the best available technical skills, education, and knowledge of the plants being reviewed, but because'of the controversial nature of allegations, cannot guarantee uncontested resolution of these allegations. However, EG&G Idaho will wherever possible, send the same personnel contributing to initial attempts at resolution to aid the NRC and stand in defense of these initial resolution attempts.
C.. A single NRC review and comment cycle between the draf t and final reports
.is assumed for each of the two projects described below.
D. Final reports are assumed to cost $15K each.
tes Page b
~.
ewec Pome im U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION FIN:
e= o.4= A6819
. PROJECT AND BUDGET PROPOSAL FOR NRC WORK o.ie August 1984 e
/
Yosect Title EVALUATION OF SELECTED NRC OPEN ITEMS BEFORE PLANT FUEL LOAD
%E Proposmo Organization IDAHO OPERATIONS OFFICE (10)
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:(Provide narrative desenptions of the raquired topics in numerical order, if an item ts not apphcable, hst title and so state.)
(2) REPORTING REQUIREMENTS A. Technical Evaluation Letter Report For Projects 1 and 2, separate technical evaluation letter reports will be prepared conforming to the instructions below.
Af ter the site investigations are complete, the NRC will provide the EG&G Ioaho Principal Investigator with copies of all reports submitted earlier by EG&G Idaho technical personnel. These reports will form the core of interim or first draf t, then a final Technical Evaluation Report (TER) documenting the work, the results of the plant evaluations ard investigations, and conclusions. The draf t TER will be submitted to the NRC Project Manager for review and comment within 20 working days of the time the EG&G Idaho Principal Investigator receives copies of the reports originally generated by EG&G Idaho personnel. Within 20 working days of receipt of NRC review comments on the draf t TER, a final TER will be sent to the NRC Project Manager (4 copies required) and the NRC Lead Engineer
(- (I copy required).
The following information will be included on the title page for the draft and final TER.
- 1. Contractor's Identification
- 2. Program or Project Title
- 3. Subjects
- 4. Author (s)
- 5. Responsible NRC Individual and Office or Division
- 6. NRC FIN Number
- 7. Document Date
- 8. Plant Name and Docket Number B. Monthly Business Letter Report EG&G Idaho will prepare a monthly business letter report, including fee recovery data, in accordance with the current NRC Manual Chapter 1102.
(3) JUSTIFICATION OF MAJOR NON-LABOR COSTS Travel funding will be expended for plant visits and meetings with NRC and Licensee personnel as surrrnarized in Section 5 below.
g ,_o ,. P.se
m-sac Pomas see U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ee o.an RN A6819
. PROJECT AND BUDGET PROPOSAL FOR NRC WORK o,te August 1984 r
ropet Title EVALUATION OF SELECTED NRC OPEN ITEMS BEFORE PLANT FUEL LOAD U " **** U'8*"'** *' "
IDAHO OPERATIONS OFFICE (ID)
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:(Provide narrative descriptk:me of the required topics in numencal order. If an item is not applicable, list titie and so state.)
(4) CONFLICT OF INTEREST There is no apparent conflict of interest.
(5) MEETINGS AND TRAVEL Because actual travel costs are anticipated to be less than the worst case estimates shown below, $125K has been used as an estimated average for all travel costs shown herein. If actual costs exceed the amount, additional funding will be required. '
A. There will be up to 84 direct technical staff weeks at *he Waterford plant site, up to 110 di ect technical staff weeks at Comanche Peak, and up to 6 days a week and 10 hours1.157407e-4 days <br />0.00278 hours <br />1.653439e-5 weeks <br />3.805e-6 months <br /> a day expended by the EG&G Idaho team.
- 8. A one-day two-person visit to NRC Offices at Bethesda, Maryland, is expected for presentations of findings and conclusions for each of the two
(~
projects.
C. Monthly progress review meetings between the NRC Project Manager and the EG&G Idaho Program Manager will be conducted in Bethesda, Maryland, at Idaho National Engineering Laboratory headquarters; at the plant site or by phone.
D. No other travel is allowed without prior approval by the NRC Project Manager.
E. Overtime must be authorized by the NRC Project Manager.
(6) NRC FURNISHED MATERIALS The NRC will provide the list of alleged improper quality control practices and a worksheet for review of allegations to the EG&G Idaho team at each plant site.
yO '" Page
^
mac pones m U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION FIN
- % **** A6819 ~
PROJECT AND BUDGET PROPOSAL FOR NRC WORK o.t.
Anormt 10Ad rotect Title EVALUATION OF SELECTED NRC OPEN ITEMS BEFORE PLANT FUEL LOAD DOE Proposing Organizat6on IDAHO OPERATIONS OFFICE (ID)
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:(Provide narrative descriptions of the required topics in numencal order. If an item is not apphcable, list t6tle and so state.)
(7) OTHER II)ENTIFIED CATEGORIES Proprietary Information If proprietary or company confidential data is provided to EG&G Idaho by the Government in connection with this contract, EG&G Idaho agrees to safeguard such information in accordance with 10 CFR 2.790 and agrees not to release such information to any person not directly involved in the performance of work under this contract unless such release is authorized in writing by the NRC Contracting Officer. Upon completion of this contract, all copies of any such proprietary or company confidential data will be returned to the NRC.
Eouipment Any purchase of equipment required for the performance of work under this project requires prior notification and written approval by the NRC Project Manager. Information to be provided in the letter to the NRC Project Manager g requesting approval: description, purpose, manufacturer model number, serial number, schedule to receive equipment, and total cost.
. Nac Pones ice case. osaa Page
..