ML20197J686
| ML20197J686 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 09/27/1996 |
| From: | David Tiktinsky NRC |
| To: | NRC |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20197J465 | List:
|
| References | |
| CON-FIN-J-5160, FOIA-97-417, RTR-NUREG-0170, RTR-NUREG-170 NUDOCS 9801050053 | |
| Download: ML20197J686 (39) | |
Text
-
Ab x
d6ll 0 (oell Tal eeJ L 9/27/96-f < lo n,4 d up<n *
- v I' *
- M/ N 44 '
/
NOTE-TO:.: FILE JS160 FROM:
DAVID TIKTINSKY-g.
SUBJECT:
PRELIMINARY MEETING WITH SNL TO DISCUSS POSSIBLE WORK RELATED TO NUREG 0170 REVALIDATION A meeting was held at SNL'on 7/23/96 to discuss the possible work to be
. performed by SNL related to the revalidation of NUREG-0170. I have enclosed the information that was discussed during that meeting.
5 4
\\\\
E 9901050053 971217
' V;
~RESNIK097-417 PDR
- - x
i 4
3
?
W/ WAC M1,,,,
3 th,,,, g............
. -... Off fM</.._.
74./
DaNo4.hkArahr
$-t..
Mr!
- c. G w.
.3'I.0//s..?tts D
J medu. 5bpdh..cpf.. SdEI 995..M.63 D...._....-..J.im....tAe C _Iu v e.
9/L-M'N d
Aq sW $sJ 4,S*I M #
9......
b 4 W qosh.A rA vet fM L g...
0
..yccomesaby M84sm c0.-...k,___....
GNL..
,...,a d.
we i
ar-rw..w' M f O fs498 s dyr Wl ** M Yl run.
f
-S.,,
b...
+.,
{ ? Sl%lmde OeUhau.kr GNL-fo(.A\\
Sn h
sord q g i
.......v..
scs).
.45 --921 g
... +
. ~...... -.-
i
",I
.. ~
.d u,
- 1 3..._.._..
N
.. _ -... ~......... - -.
g
',3
. ;f
.. ~. - _ _
-11 9
..J
'E
- "8'N M
.M.,
.=.
M-6.>
- 6 68..'N.....
4 8MD.
.P
.W.8W-W...MO..
M-e'.
rht M
?
---,....-~..a.
e.
- en
.f pe.
--e.
.a.
h
....e e.a e
e
.rew.. w ge w I
.. ~.,..
.d ine ee. em.
g..ig.e.
.,,,.,es.e
,p.
.,,4 ha w
W-.
epa.i.ii
.,9ei
.g,4.,
3 t
..se og.w
.a.-
4
...e
,y.e.e
.a e. e.e
.y.
.m.,..,,g...
. _ _ ~ _ - _. _..
,s
,x NUREG-0170 Follow-On Studies Meeting Tuesday, July 23,1996 Agenda 1
4:30 Introduction -
R. Yoshimura
. 8:45 Summary of NUREG-0170 (finding, safe; principal metric, LCF/yr -
S. Neuhauser
~ principal deficiencies,.........)
j 9:15 Issues to be addressed by revisitation of NUREG-0170 (datadaecal J. Sprung court decisions, standar:t shipper model, new packages, package surface dose rates, necident binning, fuel age, source terms, new cancer risk models, cican-up costs); technical issues cover wide range of pbcoomena and data, point estimate calculaticaal matrix would be huge (would mean complete todo of NUREG-0170), can greatly reduce computational requirements using structuered Monte Cado methods (Latin Hypercube Swnpling, LHS); analyses will require diverse expertise, all present at
- SNL, e.g., transportation data, cask types and behavior, accident source terms / RAM h.apait calculations, health effect modeling, consequnce modeling (RADTRAN, MACCS, MARINRAD), e-A effects, LHS uncertainty / sensitivity studies 10:00 Approach: (1) divide models and input data into important (2: factor 2)
S.Neuhauser and unimportant (< factor 2) by review ofliterature, especially past sensitivity studies;(2) summarize new literature about and qualitati c.ly discuss unimportant models and data; (3) describe new important models; (4) develop distributk 1 for important input parameters (shipper model, release fractions, LCF :nodel, economic costs); (5) RADTRAN LHS calculations (RADTR>.N version / data: old/old, new/old, new/new); and
. (6) document results (l.ief and detailed summaries accessible to serious lay public, technical cheers and appendices written for experts) 10:45 Break (mandatorydonuts)
I1:00 Basis for comparing predictions of the follow-on study to those in the
- S.Neuhauser NUREG 1150 and in the Modal Study a nd in the MPC EIS (metrics, time periods, i.e., campaign, annual, single shipment; principally use NUREG-0170 LCF/yr metric, also examine consequences for selected i
matrix of single shipments for specific route / cask / RAM combinations) lii30 Lunch Aoitoss=0h)
I tmm
4 1:00 Accident Source Terms: Casks (steel / lead / steel, steel /DU/ steel,......),
J. Sprung accident bins (0170 and Modal Study binning schemes; need no release, collision only, fire only, and collidon plus fire bins; use 0170 break points based on accident r;eed and fire duration because cask specific break points greatly increase number calculations), develop bin probabilities (di::tribution), release fractions (distribution) 1:45 Modal Study and MPC EIS Data and Methodologie. (what can we use, S. Neuhauser what must we reexamine and possibly modify; Mods! Study bins, collapse of Modal Study bins, MPC EIS logistics ard accident data) 2:00 RADTRAN V status (changes from RADTRAN II used in NUREG 0170) S. Neuhauser 2:30 Project Management D. Tiktmsky 2:45 Break 3:00 Proposed Tasks and Approaches All 4:30 Adjourn 6:30 Dinner (ElPinto)
AllInvited P-
- 0170esu0hl 2
tem
1 a
160 yjj Vill 130 VI Vil 97 V
yi yJJ 64 IV V
VI Vil a
$n 40
-l f
111 IV V
V1 ygg
_g g
24
$a 11
,111 ly 3
8.0 -
i til IV 0
0.5 1
1.5 2
G30(PKEl. VIN)FIREDURATIONHOURS r]sult! 5-4.
ACCIDENT SEVERITY CATIGORY CLA151F1 CAT 10N $CHE E - TRAIN 5 14
- -. =
4 g
1.786E-9 3.290E-13 2.137E-13 1.644E-13 3.459E-14 S3 (30) 8
.g 5.546E-4 1.021E-7 6.634E-8 5.162E-8 5.296E-8 5
E y
,g 1
t 2.7204E-3 5.011E-7 3.255E-7 2.531E-7 1.075E-8 l
Sg
}(0.2) 1 m
.993962 1.2275E-3 7.9611 E-4 6.140E-4 1.249E-4 T,
Tj T
T 3
4 (500)
(600)
(650)
(1050)
Thermal response (lead mid-thickness temperature, 'F)
Note:
E + x = 10" Figure 7-11 Fraction of rail accidents ' that could result in responses within each response region, assuming an accident occurs.
7-26 J
1 i
f Doughts about the Applicability of MPC EIS Results to the Revisitation of NUREG-0170 J. L Spnmg The MPC EIS estimated incident. free and accident risks for transport of the MPC by rail toni 103 fbcilities to two hmt We! monieored retrieval storage (MRS) sites, one each at the geographic centroid of the eastern and western halves of the United States, and to Yucca Mountain, the presaned locat on of the permanent geologic reposseory.
Rail accident rates were taken froen Sericks and Kvitek (1994) anNor toen FRA data, and rail routes were constructed using INTERLINE.
The Modal Study three layer (steel-lead-steel) cask was assaned to meet the minimum test crneris of 10 CFR 71, and all analyses of that cask were also ma==ed to apply to the MPC cask wiebout modification even though the MPC cask is a thin walled s:cel censiseer inserted for transport into a four layer transportanon overpeck (sesel-lead.
depleted uranien steel) with a combined weight of 106 tons. The Medal Study 20 bin (4 x 5) accident matrix is based on bin boundanes that depend on cask propertas The foDowng table==marises the properties that were used to solea the Model Study ble boundaries.
Boundary l Property Streeteral Response IAvel 0.2% serein et inner sheH 0.2% offset yield pomt of 304===l=== steel. Response inner shou is enestic for strains s 0.2%. Seals and bohn remain functional. No loss of cask latogrity 2.0% plastic strain at inner shou For strains in range 0.2 2.0 %, response 304 stainless steel is plesoc and only small V ' dimensional changes occur. Seal failme is probable.
30.0% plastic stram at inner sheH 30.0% plasbc stram is below hectue strain of 304 stamiess steel. For strains in range 2.0 30.0 %, large distortions reenk that could cause welds to crack and some crushing of cask contents. Significant seal ibilures awparead Thermal Response level
$00F at saiddle oflead shield 500F is below degradacon point of sibcone and fluorocarbon seals, sad well below smelting point ofland. Cask integrity is maisemmed.
600F st middle oflead shield Temperenne outer edge lead still below lead molting point. Cask seals 1
expected to fall.
650F st middle oflead shield Lead expected to mek. Loss of shielding when lead solidifies due to formation of voids.
1050F at middle oflead shield Differennal strains between liquid lead and sohd 304 stainless steel become significant. Increased voiding when lead solidifies. Above 1050F, lead alloys with nickel increasing probabi,lity of stress corrosion cracking.
m Because these response levels are strong functions of matenal properties, at a minimum the bin severity fractions would need to be reevaluated as the Modal Study resuks are unlikely to apply precisely to the MPC cask or to any other cask with a design that differs significantly ham the design assumed in the Modal Study. Moreover, for casks construcied from differsett materials, or even toen the same materials, but whh much changed dW% the cask failures that would be caused by the conditions that characterias each of the 20 Modal Study bins would also change and thus so would the bin's chareceensac release fraccons Thus, at a minimum, bin probabilities, bin mechanical and thermal loads on the cask, cask failure mode given the load, and bin release fractions given the loads and the failure modes would all need to be reestunated in order to see whether they were signiScantly different for the cask designs that are likely to be used to transport spent fuel heen reactors to temporary or permanent repositories in the near futme.
The couapse of the Modal Study 20 bins to 6 bins would also need to be reexamineJ as that couapse produces bins that encompass very large ranges of bin propernes, et least for the bins that represent the more sevas accidents. For example, the most severc of the six bins used in the MPC EIS is generated by the collapse into one bin of eight
- s 01 marc 0h!
I W22.96
Modal Study bins with severity fractions that range from 1.2x10 to 3.5x10'" and inner shell strains and lead mid-d thickness temperatures that cover the full range of the accidem matrix.
Becauw the railroads have proposeo the abandonemem of the voluntary operating restrictions that they currently use (35 mph speed limit for the RAM train; and when passing either the RAM train or the other train stops and the rnoving train reduces its speed to 35 mph), the effect of operating without these resenctions on the entire rail transport risk assessment methodology would need to be examined. Of course, should any of these changes have a significant non<enservative impact, then the reevaluanon would have to be more thorough and would probably require recalculation of risks rather than simply identification of differences and guesstimation of the shifts.
jti ci7cmpcyti) -
2 7a196 s
PDE!S: Do Nor Car E 27 December 27,1993 E.7A Cask Accident Response Characteristics E.7A.1 Accident Severity Lategories A generic method to characterin the psential severity of transportation accidents was fast deceribed in an NRC report commordy nierred to as NUREG4170 (NRC 1977a). The NRC method divides the spectrum of transponatjon accident severities into eight categories. Subsequently, other studies have divided the same accident spectrum into 6 categories (Wilmot 1981) and 20 categories (Fischer et al.1987) Results from the latter study, which uses 20 severity categories and is cammanly referred to as the " modal study," are used in this analysis. All 20 categories of the modal study were used in the evaluations performed for this EIS.
The modal study (Fischer et al.1987) was the result of an initiative taken by the NRC to refine more precisely the analysis presented in NUREG-0170 for spent nuclear fuel shipping casks.
Whereas the NUREG 0170 analysis was primarily performed using best engmeermg judgments and presumptions concerning cask response, the modal study relies on sophisticated structural and thermal engineering analysis and a probabilistic assessment of the conditions that could be experienced in severt transportation accidents. 7he modal study results are based on representative spent nuclear fuel casks that were assumed to have been designed, manufactured, operated, and maintained in accordance with national codes and standards. Design p.r. comers of the i+- wive casks were chosen to meet the minimum test criteria specified in 10 CFR Pan 71. The study is bebeved to provide realistic yet conservative results foe radiological releases under transport accident conditions.
In the modal study, potential accident damage to a cask is categorized according to the magnitudes of the mechanical forces (impact) ani thermal' forces (fue) to which a cask may be subjected during an accident. Because all accidents can be described in these terms, severity is independent of the specific accident sequence. In other words, any sequence of events that results in an accident in which a cask is subjected to forces within a certain range of values is assigned to the accident severity category associated with that range. The accident severity scheme is designed to take into account all credible transportation accidents, including accidents with low probability but high consequences and those with high probability but low consequences.
~
PDEIS: Do Not Car E 28 December 27, IVis Each severity category actually represents a set of accidents defined by a combination of mechanical and thermal forces. A conditional probability of occunence - that is, the probability ist if an accident occurs,it is of a particular severity-is assigned to each category. The cask response regions and the fractional occunences by accident severity category are shown in Figure E.6 for truck and rail accidents. Accidents in Region (1,1)- R(1,1)- are the lent severe but most frequent, whereas accidents in R(4,5) are very severe but very infrequent. To determine the expected frequency of an accident of a given severity, the conditional probability in the category is multiplied by the baseline accident rate. The entire spectrum of se:ident severities was considered in this accident risk usessment.
De accident consequence assessment consideaed the potential impacts from only the most severe transportation accidents. For risk assessment purposes, the r,everity of an accident must be viewed in terms of potential radiological consequences, which are directly proportional to the fraction of radioactive material within a cask that is released to the environment during the accident.
In terms of the modal study accident characterization scheme (Figure E.6), the most severe transportation accidents conespond to those in R(1,5), R(2,5), R(3,5), R(4,5), R(4,1), R(4,2), R(4,3),
and R(4,4). Ahhough these regions span the entire range of mechanical and thermal accident loads considered in the modal study, they are charactemed by a single set of release fractions and were therefore considered together in the accident consequence assessment.
The conditional probability of the most severe accidents (i.e., the probability that an accident is of maaimum severity usuming that one has occuned) was determined by summmg the modal study conditional probabilities for the eight individual accident regions listed above. De 4
resultant overall conditional probability is 9.84 x 10 per accident for truck transportation,and 1.25 x 10 per accident for rail transportation. De stated probabilities encompus the entire d
spectrum of severe accidents, although more than 97% of the severe truck accidents and nearly 100%
of the severe rail accidents actually occur in R(1,5). Table E ll provides the conditional accident probabilities for each of the 20 accident categories for both truck and rail.
Because the modal study accident categories are categonzed according to the mechanical and thermal forces applied to a spent nuclear fuel cask, the relene fractions can be applied to shipments of spent nuclear fuel by barge.11owever, the conditional probabilities associated with accidents in those categories are not specified in Fischer et al. (1987) for barge shipmer.ts. For i
U
?d/ Lib' LIO />02 VIt
- t. *d v un s nws e a o, o n,o conservatism, the conditional accident probabilities associated with rail transportation of spent nuclear fuel were also used for barge transport.
E.7A.2 Cask Relene Fractions Radiological conseopences were calculated by assigning cask release fractions to each accident severity category.7he release fraction is dermed as the fraction of the radioactive material in a cuk that could be releued from the package in a given severity of accident. Release fractions take into account all mechanisms necest,ary to create a release of radioactive material fmm a a_.
damaged cut to the envimnment. Release fractions vary according to the spent nuclear fuel type and the physical and chemical characteristics of specific radionuclides within the spent nuclear fuel. For instance, most solid raiionuclides are difficult to relene in particulate form and are therefore relatively Wep"sible. Conversely, gaseous radionuclides ne relatively easy to release if the cuk is compromised in an accident.
For conservatism, the modal study usumed that 100% of any radioactive material releued from the fuel rods would escape to the environment if the accident was severe enough to cumyiviulse the cak contamment. In u lity, several processes, which are difficult to analyze quaatitatively, would be expected to reduce the amount of radioactive material released fmm the cask to the environment in the event of an accident. For example, particulates released from the rods would seule within the cask or become' lodged in the leak passages. SimilarIy, vapors released would tend to cool as they moved imm the damaged rods to the cut walls and would plate-out on interior surfaces. *ltese phenomena would reduce the actual tricase of radioactive material from the spent nuclear fuel cask ta the envimament (Fischer et al.1987). Table E.12 presents the release fractions used in the transportation risk assessment for the 20 modal study accident regions.
E.7.5 Atmospheric Conditions Radioactive material released to the atmosphere is transported by the wind. The amount of dispersion, or dilution, of the radioactive material in the air depends on the meteorologic conditions at the time of the accident. Because predicting the specific location of an off site transportation-related accident is impossible, generic atmospheric conditions were selected for the accident risk and consequence assessments.
PDE!3:Do Not Cor E 30 December 27.1993 For the accident risk assessment, average (neutral) weather conditions were assumed; these -
concidons are represented by Puquill Stability Cass D with a windspeed of 9 mi/h (4 m/s). Average meteorologic condidons are the most frequendy occurring atmospheric stability conditions in the United States and thus would most likely be present if an accident occuned involving a spent nuclear fuel shipment. Observations at National Weather Service meteorologic stations from more than 300 U.S. locations indicate that annually, average (neutral) conditions (represented by Pasquill Casses C and D) occur about 50% of the time, whereas stable conditions (Pasquill Casses E and F) occur about 33% of the time, and unstable conditions (Pasquill dasses A and B) occur about 17%
of the time (Doty et al.1976). The average category predominates in all seasons but is most prevalent (nearly 60% of the observations) during winter.
For the accident conseguence assessment, doses were assessed under average (neutral) atmospheric conditions (Pasquill Stability Cass D with a windspeed of 9 mi/h [4 m/s)) and unfavorable (stable) conditions (Pasquill Stabality Cass F with a windspeed of 2.2 mi/h !! m/s)). The results calculated for average condinons represent the most likely consequences, and the results for unfavorable conditions represent a " worst case
- weather situation in which the least amount of l
dilution would occur, resulting in the highest air concentrations of radioactive material.
E.7.6 Health Risk Conversion Factors The health risk conversion factors used throughout this analysis to estimate the number of expected radiation-related latent cancer fatalities from radiological exposures were derived from the 4
4 ICRP (1991): 5.0 x 10 per person-rem for members of the public and 4.0 x 10 per person rem for workers, latent cancer fatalities were deternuned over the lifetimes of exposed populations.
l
~
E.7,7 Incident-Free Exposure Scenarios for Maximally FW Individuals The risks to MEls were estimated for a number of hypothetical exposure scenarios for each alternative. De receptors included crew members, departure inspectors, and members of the public exposed during traffic obstructions (traffic jams), while working at a service s'ation, or while living near a storage site. The doses and risks to MEls were calculated for particular dic=s and durations of exposure, which were similar to those used in previous transportation assessments (DOE 1987, l
1
PDEIS: Do Not Cite E.88 Decembe? 27,1995 I
TABLE E.11 Conditional Accident Probabilities for Truck and Rail Shipments of Spent Nuclear Fuel Conditional Accident Probabilities Severity Composim of the 20 Modal Category Study Regions
- Truck Rail 1
R(1,1) 9.94 x 10'3 9.94 x 10 3 2
R(1,2), R(1,3) 4.05 x 10'S 2.02 x 10'3 3
R(2,1), R(2,2), R(2,3) 3.82 x 10'3 2.72 x 10'3 4
R(3,1), R(3,2), R(3,3) 1.80 x 10'3 5.55 x lod d
5 R(1,4), R(2,4), R(3,4) 1.55 x 10-5 6.14 x 10 4
d 6
R(1,5),R(2,5), R(3,5), R(4,5),
9.84 x 10 1.25 x 10 R(4,1), R(4,2), R(4,3), R(4,4)
- The 20 modal study regions are grouped into six categories on the basis of the cask release fractions. Regions with equal release fractions are considered together.
Source: Data from Fischer et al. (1987).
t
PDE15: Do Nss Cite E.89 December 27,1993 TABLE E.12 Cask Release TractJons to the Environment for Each Accident Severity Category C,.. ; of the Rolesse Practions Severity 20 Model Study Cesegery AN8' Inon Gas ladine Cesium Rotheruum Particulate R(1,1) 0 0
0 0
0 2
R(1,2) R(1.3) 9.9 x 10'3 7.5 x lys 6.0 x 104 8.1 x 10'1 6.0 x 104 3
R(2,1),R(2.2) R(2.3) 3.3 x 1g2 2.5 x 1O 2.0 m 178 2.7 x 104 2.0 x 17' d
2.7 x 10'8 2.0 x 104 4
RO,1), E(3.2), R(3,3) 0.33 23x10'3 2.0 x 10d
$0 x 10'd 4.8 x 178 2.0 x 104 5
R(1,4), R(2,4), RQ 4) d39 43 x 173 6
R(1J), RQJ). ROJ),
0.63 43 x !g2 2.0 x 173 4.8 x 10d 2.0 x 1gs R(4.5).R(4.1) R(4.2).
R(4J). R(4.4)
' 1hr 20 modal undy regions are grouped leno sin emeegories on the basis of the cask release frecuens. Repons with equal rolesse fractions est cansadored together.
Source: Date from Pischer et at (1987).
[
+
l t
1 s
~
s r
=
?
@@Og
?
cn m
I f f i.
r
,e 2
,!a c
a
- 1 A
'l b
bb
- *e
$s f s y
6 a
g a
O
$'gf[4
$ T l-S J p' s
- x 8 5-
- v
=
E f.
9+,
as
+
c g
d.
3 5
i]"
b3 7
3 T
m
'A O
$d }n
% l-T a
m g-a a
P a.
1-5 e
~
CONTRACT MANAGEMENT CHANGES IN NMSS i
10-Jun-96, PAGE 1
TOPICS TO BE DISCUSSED o PURPOSE OF BRIEFING o REASONS FOR CHANGES
- OFFICE OF THE CONTROLLER GOALS
-OFFICE DIRECTOR INITIATIVES oNMSS PLAN TO MEET GOALS / INITIATIVE o CHANGES IN TM/TAPM/ DIVISION MANAGEMENT RESPONSIBILITIES
- MLSR REVIEW i
10-Jun-96, PAGE 2
l PURPOSE OF BRIEFING o DISCUSS REASONS FOR CHANGES TO MANAGEMENTOF TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE PRGJc. CTS o OUTLINE NMSS'S PLAN TO MEET OC GOALS / OFFICE DIRECTOR'S INITIATIVES o OUTUNE CHANGES IN PROJECT MANAGEMENT RESPONSIBILITIES
- DISCUSS!ON OF TOOLS TO ASSIST IN CARRYING OUT RESPONSIBluTIES o NMSS FINANCIAL PLAN o MLSR F
10-Jum96, PAGE 3 y
w
-POLICY CHANGES AGENCYWIDE CHANGES
-EMPHASIS ON REDUCTION OF CARRYOVER IN AGENCY o COMMIT / OBLIGATE FUNDS EARLY IN THE FY o EXPEND CURRENT YEAR FUNDS IN YEAR OBTAINED o OVEFiALL AGENCY CARRYOVER TOO HIGH, THEREFORE, l
PROGRAM OFFICES MUST REDUCE CARRYOVER TO MEET FINANCIAL GOALS SET BY THE OFFICE OF THE CONTROLLER.
OWE HAVE BEEN INFORMED BY OC THAT IF WE CAN NOT MEET OC'S GOALS ON CARRYOVER,THEN OUTYEAR BUDGETS WILL BE REDUCED BY THE AMOUNT WE ARE OVER THE GOAL a
i 10-Jun-96, PAGE 4 i
POUCY CHANGES (CONT)
NMSS OFFICE DIRECTOR DIRECTIVES:
oTECHNICAL MONITORS AND DIVISION MANAGEMENT SHOULD SE MORE AWARE OF FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT ASPECTS OF TECHNICAL
' ASSISTANCE PROJECTS.
oDIVISION TM'S AND MANAGEMENT ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR ASSURING THATTA DOLLARS ARE UTIL' ZED IN A MANNER WHICH WILL PRODUCE TIMELY, AND USEFUL PRODUCTS.
i 1
I l
10-Jun-96, PAGE 5 1
i
O POUCY CHANGES (CONT 1 OC GOALS ON A MACRO SCALE (ENTIRE OFFICE) THE 8:OLLOWING ARETHE GOALS THAT HAVE BEEN SET.
o 65% OF FUNDS SHOULD BE OBUGATED BY 3/31 (THIS EQUATES TO ABOUT 80% COMMITTED BY 1/1) o CARRYOVER FUNDING AT THE END OF THE FISC ALYEAR SHOULD CC4ER NO MORE THAN 60-90 DAYS OF FUNDING NMSS* CURRENT FINANCIAL PERFORMAMCE NMSS CURRENTLY HAS ABOUT $4 MILLION IN CARRYOVER FUNDS ABOVE THE GOAL SETBY OC FOr? NON-HLWFUNDS.
NMSS OBLIGATED 38% OF NON-HLWFUNDS BYN31)96 NMSS ONLY SPENT 1/3 OF FUNDS ALLOTTED IN FY95 DURING FY95 10-Jun-9C, PAGE 6
.. =_
NMSS PLAN TO MEET OC'S GOAL /
OFFICE DIRECTIVES OC'S GOALS o IN ORDER TO ASSURE THAT WE MEET OC*S GOAL RELATED.'O CARRYOVER, NMSS WILL PERFORM THE FOLLOWING:
- FUNDS WILL BE PROVIDED IN SUCH A MANNER TO ALLOW FOR 45 DAYS OF CARRYOVER FUNDING (FUNDS UNTIL 11/15)
-IF iT IS DETERMINED THAT FUNDS PROVIDED WILL NOT BE EXPENDED BY 11/15. THEN THOSE FUNDS WILL BE DEOBLIGATED AND UTILIZED FOR OTHER TA PROJECTS
-TIMING OF FUNDS COMMITMENTS NEED TO BE PLANNED FC-8 THE FY BY ELH DIVIStON ON A JOB CODE BY JOB CODE BASIS TO ASSUHE THAT COMMITMENT AND OBLIGATION GOALS ARE MET. SINCE THE GOALS SET BY OC ARE VERY AGGRESSIVE, WE MUST PREPARE STATEMENTS OF WORA 1
AS EARLY AS POSSIBLE TO ASSURE EARLY STARTUP OF WORK.
10-Jun-96, PAGE 7
e NMSS PLAN TO MEET OC'S GOALJ OFFICE DIRECTIVES (CONT)
O_FFICE DIRECTOR DIRECTIVES
- TM'S SHOULD KNOW THE STATUS OF AND TRACKCOMMITMENTS/OBUGKTIONS/
EXPEDITURES FOR THEIR PROJECTS ON A REALTIME BASIS. TM'S SHOULD ALSO REMEW AND EVALUATE CONTRACT DEUVERABLES TO ASSURE QUAUTY OF PRODUCTS.
- DIVISION MANAGEMENT SHOULD KNOW THE STATUS OF THE COMMITMENT /
l OBUGATIONFXPEDITURE OF THIER FUNDS. MANAGEMENT SHOULD ALSO
{
HAVE A Pl.AP FOR UTIUZING ANY UNCOMMITTED FUNDS IN A TIMELY MANNER.
l PRODUCTS. AODUCED BY CONTRACTORS SHOULD BE FOR A SPECIFIC PURPOSE THAT WILL HELP NMSS PERFORM ITS MISSION.
j
-PROJECTS MUST BE PLANNED IN A TIMELY MANNER AND THE SOW MUST BE PREPARED EARLY IN ORDER TO ASSURE THAT OC'S FINANCIAL GOALS ARE MET.
t i
f i
i e
10-Jun-96, PAGE 8
A i
CHANGES IN TM/ DIVISION MANAGEMENT /
TAPM RESPONSIBILITIES
-THE RESPONSIBILITIES THAT WERE LAID OUT IN THE NMSS BRIEFINGS ON ICLEMENTATION OF MD 11.7 HAVE NOT CHANGED (SEE ATTACHMENT)
I i
- ADDITIONALRESPONSIBluTIES FOR TM*S o EARLY PROJECT PLANNING AND SOW DEVELOPMENT l
o AWARENESS OF SPENDING RAiES AND GOALS (LE. 45 DAY CARRYOVER) o NEED FOR EARLY COMMITMENT AND OBUGATION OF FUNDS (TM SHOULO i
BE AWARE OF THE STAM OF FUNDING AND BE ABLE TO PROVIDE MANAGEMENT i
i WITH INFORMATION ON THE TIMING OF FUNDfNG ACTIONS.
l i
o AWARENESS OF DELIVERABLE SCHEDULES (AND KEEPING iHEM ON TRACK) i o TIMELY PREPARATION OF NRC COMMENTS ON CONTRACTOR FEPORTS r
oBETTER COMMUNICATION WITH CONTRACTOR AND TAPM TO ENSURE REQUIRED ACTIONS ARETAKEN o REVIEW MLSR FROM A FUNDING AND SPENDING RATE PERSPECTIVE 10-Jun-96, PAGE 9 j
i r
4
[
CARRYING OUT NEW RESPONSIBlUTIES (TM'S)
- ADDITIONALRESPONSIBILITIES FOR TWS (CONT) o REVIEW THE FIN Pl.AN (WILL BE DISTRIBUTED WEEKLY) TO REVIEW THE STATUS OF BUDGETED FUNDS, COMMITMENTS, OBUGATIONS, CARRYOVER AND EXPENDITURES.
WE WILL REVIEW THE FIN PLAN DURING THIS SESSION o REVIEW THE MLSR TO REVIEW CONTRACT STATUS (BOTH TECHNICAL AND FINANCIAL)
WE WILL LOOK ATMLSR REVEWS DURING THIS SESSDN o HAVE FREQUENT COMMUNIC ATIONS WITH THE CONTRACTOR TO ASSURE THAT PROJECTIS ON TRACK o PROVIDE COMMENTS TO CONTRACTORS WITHIN THE SCHEDULE SET BY THE CONTRACT.
oEVALUATE THE QUAUTY OF CONTRACTOR DELIVERABLES 10-Jun--96, PAGE 10 t
[
CHANGES IN TM/ DIVISION MANAGEMENT /
TAPM RESPONSIBILITIES (CONTi
- ADDITIONALRESPONSIBILITIES FOR DIVISION MANAGEMENT i
o KNOW THE STATUS OF YOUR COMMITMENTS /OBUGATIONS.
oBE AWARE OF THE STATUS OF UNEXPENDED FUNDS TO MINIMlZE CARRYOVER TAKE ACTION AS NECE3SARY TO REDUCE CARRYOVER (E.G., GIVE UP FUNDS.
TRANSFER FUNDS BETWEEN TASKS, DEOBUGATIONS ETC.)
oASSURE THAT STAFF PREPARES SOW'S EARLY ON TO ASSURE TIMELY FUND'NG ACTIONS of-OR FUNDS NOT YET COMMITTED / OBLIGATED, KNOW WHAT THE FUNDS WILL BE SPENT ON AND WHEN THE WORK WILL BE SENT OUT.
oMAKE SURE STAFF PREPARES COMMENTS ON CONTRACTOR REPORTS ON A 4
TIMELY BASIS I
i 10-Jun-96, PAGE 11 i
i L
u
~,,.
CARRYING OUT NEW RESPONSIBILITIES (DIVISION MGMT)
_ - ADDITIONALRESPONSIBILITIES FOR DIVISION MANAGEMENT (CONT) o REVIEW THE FIN Pt.AN (WILL BE DISTRIBUTED WEEKLY) TO REVIEW THE STATUS OF BUDGETED FUNDS, COMMITMENTS, OBUGATIONS, CARRYOVER AND EXPENDITURES.
oFREQUENT COMMUNICATIONS WITH TM'S AND CONTRACTORS ON CONTRACT RELATED ISSUES (TAPM*S WILL ASSIST MANAGEMENT IF NECESSARY).
)
i b
^
i 10-Jun-96, PAGE 12 i
r
~
5-
-ADDITIONAL RESPONSIBluTIES FOR TAPMS oCLOSER TRACKING OF SPENDING RATES AND DEOBUGATING FUNDS AS NEEDED.
oADDl]ONAL PROJECT MANAGEMENT RESPONSIBUTIES ON MONITORING SCHEDULES AND TIMING OF NRC RESPONSES I
oCLOSE TRACKING OF COMMITMENTS AND OBUGATION OF FUNDS oBETTER COMMUNICATION WITH CONTRACTORS AND TM TO ASSURE REQUIRED ACTIONS ARE TAKEN oASSURE THAT CONTRACTORS ARE PROVIDING THE REQUIRED INFORMATION IN MLSR'S 4
o ASSIST DIVISION MANAGEMENT ON CONTRACTUAL MATTERS
~
1 o TRACKING OF CONTRACTS FROM AN OVERALL PERSPECTIVETO ASSURE FUNDS ARE TRANSFERRED BETWEEN PROJECTS, DEOBUGATED, ETC. TO SUPPORT i
MEETING THE FINANCIALGOALS.
i i
I
[
i 10-Jun-96. PAGE 13 j
i i
1
1 FINANCIAL PLAN REVIEW STEPS IN FUNDING A) ASSUME A BUDGETED AMOUNT FOR A PROJECT.
s B) PREPARE SOW AND REQUEST PROPOSAL FROM CONTRACTOR (FOR COMMERCIAL CONTRACTS ONLY, FUNDS MAY BE COMMITTED AT THIS POINT)
C) RECEIVE PROPOSAL FROM CONTRACTOR INCLUDING SPENDING PLAN.
D) EVALUATE PROPOSAL AND NEGOTIATE WITH CONTRACTOR UNTIL BOTH PARTIES AGREE ON TERMS AND CONDITIONS.
E) FUNDING DOCUMENTIS PREPARED (FOR DOE PROJECTS THIS IS AN NRC FORM 173).
(FUNDS ARE COMMITTED AT THIS POINT IN THE PROCESS)
F) FOR DOE LAB WORK, WHEN THE NRC FORM 173 IS COUNTERSIGNED BY DOE AND RETURNED TO THE NRC THE FUNDS ARE OBUGATED. FOR COMMERCIALCONTRACTS WHEN THE WORK IS ACCEPTED AND COUNTERSIGNED BY THE CONTRACTOR THE FUNDS ARE OBUGATED (FUNDING LETTER FROM DC) i l
10-Jun-96, PAGE 14
FINANCIAL PLAN REVIEW NMSS FINANCIAL PLAN KEY A) B&R NUMBER - THIS IS THE CODE FOR ACCOUNTING PURPOSES THAT IDENTIFIES THE BUDGETED AREA.
B) CONTRACT TITLE C) JOB CODEIDENTIFIER D) BUDGET - THIS IS THE TOTAL BUDGET OF CURRENT FY DOLLARS ASSIGNED TO A PROJECT E) COMM - THESE ARE FUNDS IN WHICH EITHER AN NRC FORM 173 HAS BEEN SENT OUT OR A RFPA HAS BEEN PREPARED FOR A COMMERCIALCONTRACT. (NOTE THAT EACH TIME A COMMITMENT DOCUMENT IS PREPARED IT IS USTED ON A SEPARATE LINE ON THE FIN PLAN (FOR ACCOUNTING PURPOSES))
F) OBL - FUNDING IN WHICH THE PEIFORMING ORGANIZATION HAS COUNTERSIGNED THE FUNDING DOCUMENT (NRC FORM 173 OR COMMERCIALCONTRACT ACCEPTANCE)
G) UNCOSTED C/O INTO FY96 - THIS IS THE CARRYOVER FUNDS DERIVED FROM THE MLSR WHICH COVERED THE MONTH OF SEPTEMBER,1995 H) TOTAL AVAILaBLE EQUATES TO UNCOSTED CARRYOVER PLUS THE BUDGETED AMOUNT.
i
.10-Jun-96, PAGE 15 I
FINANCIAL PLAN REVIEW i
NMSS FINANCIAL PLAN KEY (CONT)
- 1) FY96 EXP AS OF../96 - EXPEL 4DITURE DATA DERIVED FROM LATEST MLSR J) FUNDS YET TO BE SPENT EQUATES TO TOTAL AVAK.ABLE (H ABOVE) MINUS FY96 EXP (I ABOVE)
K) PROJECT END DATE - END DATE FOR DOE PROJECT OR COMMERCIAL CONTRACT l
l (FOR TASK ORDER CONTRACTS,THIS IS THE END DATE FOR THE CONTRACT, NOT THE TASK)
L) SOURCE - CONTRACTOR OR LAB M) PROJECT MANAGFR - THE TAPM AND THE TM N) CONTRACT NUMBER - COMMERCIALCONTRACTS ONLY, IDENTIFIER O) DOCUMENT NUMBER - IDENTIFIER NUMBER FOR FUNDS COMMITMENT DOCUMENT l
P) COMM IN FFS - FOR PMDA INFORMATION i
10-Jun-96, PAGE 16
^
.[
[
l t
i REVIEW OF MLSR i
A) REVEW TECHNICAL PROGRESS AND PLAN FOR NEXT PERIOD i
- TM AE IN THE UNIQUE POSITION TO REVEW THIS INFORMATION AND THE j
IMPACT OF EVENTS (SUCH AS EXTERNALCOMMENTS FROM OTHER AGENCIES)
ON BOTH SCHEDULE AND SPENDING.
j i
B) REVIEW AND EVALUATE MILESTONE STATUS j
i C) REVEW PROBLEM ANAS IDENTIFIED D) REVEW THE SPENDING PLAN AND EVALUATE WHETHER THE CONTRACTOR i
APPEARS TO BE ON TRACK.
f I
E) COMMUNICATETHE RESULTS OF YOUR REVEW WITH THE ASSIGNED TAPM f
i-i e
f SPECIAL NOTES:
5 l-A) IN SOME C ASES THE MLSR*S THAT ARE BEiNG PREPARED BY LASS / CONTRACTORS l
l ARE NOT PROVIDING SATISFACTORY INFORMATION OR LEVEL OF DETAILIN THE MLSR RELATED TO MILESTONES AND SPENDING. PMDA IS WORKING WITH THE INDIVIDUAL i
l LABS / CONTRACTORS TO PROVIDE THE REQUIRED INFORMATION.
t i
B) THE TAPM'S ARE AVAILABLETO ASSIST BOTH TECHNICAL MONITORS AND DIVISION MANAGEMENT ON THE RESOLUTION OF PROBLEMS.
10-Jun-96, PAGE 17 i
i I
~.
SUMMARY
-SIGNIFICANT POLICY CHANGES IN NRC (AGENCYWIDE, OC, NMSS)
-DRASTIC ACTION REQUIRED TO MEET GOALS
-PROJECT MANAGEMENT RESPONSIBILITIES NEED TO INCREASED AS A RESULT OF OUTLINED CHANGES l
l I
l i
}
l t
i i
t i
i i
10-Jun-96, PAGE 18 i
I i.
f I
L
4
+
t 11 lillfillli i
illiiI 1;
i i
g a
- gagi, e
5 5
5 5
l bbils -
=
~
l
=l alls
~
~
~
S 5
Elog l,
, lsl 5
5 5
lg
~
5 5:!! li la!!! i!!!!!!!!!
l g
lig
[
! 5:!5 is 11!!! !!!!!I!!!I lg f e[,
Ii i
i i
I 11 I
i n
5 1
lI p l
llIsi l
e si s
l l
V I
liIl!
l
~
l I
l
~
o
. RESPONSIBILITY TAPM TM PLANNING ANDINITIATION PHASE PREPARE OFFICE APP PREPARES FORMS AS NEEDED PROVIOES INPUT TO TAPM.
PREPARE A SOW REVIEY.*S AND FINAUZES PREPARES DRAFT SOW SCW AS PROVIDED BYTM.
INCLUDING SiOLL MIK APO LEVEL OF EFFORT, RECOMMEfCS LAB, PREPARES FIP BACKUP INCLICING A REQMTS. ANALYSIS APO ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES PREPARE IGCE PREPARES DOCUMENTATION PROVIDES SiOLL MIK
($250K/ YEAR OR $500K FOR UFE OF TASK / PROJECT)
AND LEVEL OF EFFORT.
1 PREPARE DOE SOURCE SELECTION JUSTIFICATION (367)
PREPARE FORM WITH TM PROVIDES JUSTIFICATION INPUT.
8ASED ON 11.7 COOFOINATE DUPUCATION REVIEW PERFORMS AS NECESSARY.
COMPLETE SECURTY FORM NRC 187 PREPARES DOCUMENTATION PROVIDES TAPM WITH TYFES l
WITH INPUT FROM TM.
OF CLASSFICATION NEEDED.
OBTMN REQUIRED APPROVALS OBTMNS PROPER ADMINISTRATNECOOf0lNATES PROJECT WITH l
CONCURRENCES.
DIVISION MANAGEMENT.
i ISSUE RFP PACKAGE TO DOE AND LABORATORY PREPARES DOCUMENTATION.
t i
i i
RESPONSIBILITY TAPM TM REVIEWS ADMINISTRATIVEf REVIEWS TECHNICAL ASPECTS RiiVIEW PROPOSALVS. IGCE,IF APPUCABLE FINANCIAL ASPECTS OF PROP.
OF PROPOSALS ANO PROVIDE PREPARES EVALUATION INPUT TO TAPM.
SUMMARY
FORMULATES WPJTEUP AND REVIEWS COI STATEMENTS IN EVALUATE POTENTIAL FOR CONFUCT OF INTEREST l
DISCUSS WITH LAB IF PROPOSALS.
NECESSARY.
IDENTFY COSTCONCERNS/
PREPARES TECHNICAL 1D ENTIFY TECHNICAUCOST CO*:CERNS FOR DISCUSSION QUESTIONS.
PROBLEMS.
PREPARES FORMS WITH TM PARTICIPATES IN NEGOTIATIONS.
DOCUMENT RESULTS OF NEGOTIATIONS INPUT.
PREPARE PROPER PROVIDESINPUT AS TO OBTAIN APPROVALS FOR USE OF CLASSIFIED MATERIALS DOCUMENTATION.
NATURE OF CLASSIFICATION.
I l
PREPARES DOCUMENTATION.
CERTIFY FUNDS AND ISSUE NRC FORM 173 (SOEW)
I PERFORMANCE PHASE REVIEW MLSR TO ENSURE COSTS ARE REASONABLE AND COMMERSURATE JOINT RESPONSE!LITY JOINT RESPONSE!UTY WITH TECHNICAL PROGRESS
I RESPONSIBILITY TAPM TM l
REVIEW AND ANALYZE SPEPOING PLAN UPDATES FORVARIANCES OF JOINT RESPONSSIUTY JOINT RESPONSSIUTY GREATER THAN 20% TO DETE8EdlNE IF WORK PROJECTED TO BE WITHIN PREPARES RESPONSES SCHEDULE AND COSTS.
AS NEEDED.
ENSURE DOE COMPUANCE WITH UMITATION OF COST / FUNDS PROVISION MONITORS COSTS PROVIDESINPUT AS NECESSARY.
i REVIEW BILLED COSTS AGAINST PERFORMANCE AND COSTS REPORTED PERFORMS REVIEW WITH PROVIOESINPUT AS NECESSARY.
IN THE MLSR TO DETERMINE WHETHER B'LLS ARE REASONABLE INPUT FROM TM i
APPROVE OR DISAPPROVE DOE CHARGES WITHIN 20 D AYS. A WRITTEN SIGNS OFF ONVOUCHERS PROVIDESINPUT AS NECESSARY.
+
EXPLANATION MUST ACCOMPANYDISAPPROVAL
)
ENSURE DOE COMPUANCE WITH SOW, LE., ENSURE THAT SCIEDULES JOINT RESPONSBIUTY JOINT RESPONSSIUTY ARE MET, PROBLEMS ADDRESSED AND RESOLVED EXPEDITIOUSLY, PERPARES DOCUMENTATION AND THAT THE PROJECT STA)S WITHIN ESTIMATED COSTTO THE AS NEEDED ETJENT PRACTICABLE.
[
PROVIDE TECHNICAL DIRECTION TO THE tR ORATORY.
RESPONSSLE, A CC OF WNTTEN COMMENTS SHOULD BE PROVIDED TO TAPM r
ADHERE TO MO 12, SECURTY.
JOINT RESPONSSIUTY JOINT RESPONSIBIUTY i
l I
i f
RESPONSIBILITY TAPM TM ISSUE STOP WORK OMER OR NOTICE OF TERMINATION FOR PREPAREDOCUMENTATION AS PRCMDEIfrUTTO TAPM 4
PROJECTS WITH UNSATISFACTORY PEMORMkeCE OR IF THEY ARE NEEDED NO LONGER NEEDED.
ANALYSE PROPOSED LABORATORY TERMINATION SETTLEMENT COSTS RESPONSSLE PERFORMS TECHNICAL REVIEW AND COOMINATE TERMMATION AGREEMENT WITH DOE.
REVIEW, EVALUATE AND APPROVE DELNERABLES FORTECHNICAL RESPONSSLE. A CC OF WNTTEN SUFFICIENCY AND PROVIDE COMMENTS, AS APPROPRIATE,IN A COMMENTS SHOULD BE TIMELY MANNER.
PROWDED TO TAPM i
ENSURE REOtRRED DOCUMENTS ARE FILED IN THE OFFICE PROJECT FILE.
RESPONSELE I
i WORK COMPLETION AND CLOSEOUT PHASE OF PROJECTS i
i APPROVE FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF DOE WORK PRODUCT.
RESPONSSLE Q
PROVIDE W'rHTTEN EVALUATION OF DOE LABORATORY PENORMANCE.
RESPONSSLE i
ENSURE THATINTERIM AND FINAL REPORTS ARE SUBMITTED TO NUDOCS.
RESPONSSLE, ALSO MAINTAINS COPfES OF DELNERABLES 4
I l
w w
y y
3
-y-
.> +
y w -
-w--
m e
r
- +.
---m
-+-
w w,
we-
..e-
RESPONSIBILITY T/.PM TM
. RESPOND TO REQ'ESTS REGARHNG PROPERTY UTIUZATION.
RESPONSELE I
cot 4PLETE CLOSEOUT BY RECONCluMG COSTS AND DEOBUGATNG RESPONSSLE EXCESS FUtOS.
i 4
)
1 m.
4
..,.., _..,....... _.....