ML20237E837
| ML20237E837 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 08/21/1998 |
| From: | Mearse S NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION (ADM) |
| To: | Patrick W CENTER FOR NUCLEAR WASTE REGULATORY ANALYSES |
| References | |
| CON-FIN-J-5220, CON-NRC-02-98-002, CON-NRC-2-98-2 NUDOCS 9809010213 | |
| Download: ML20237E837 (5) | |
Text
.r bCD a"coq J
- a UNITED STATES s-j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION h
'C WASHINGTON, D Cf h05hdcoht.
% *****,o
- J5 AUG 4O Wesley C. Patrick, President Center for Nuclear Waste Regulatory Analyses EUBJECT CN _ _.
6220 Culebra Road PO Drawer 28510 PROJECT n.... _ _~ _
San Antonio, TX. 78228-0510
Subject:
Task Order No. 3 Entitled, " Seismic Reviews for Title ll Sites", Under Contract NRC-02-98-002
Dear Dr. Patrick:
In accordance with the task order procedures of the subject contract, this letter definitizes Task Order No. 3. This effort shall be performed in accordance with the enclosed Statement of Work and the Contractor's technical proposal dated July 15,1998, which is incorporated by reference and made a part of this task order.
Task Order No. 3 shall be in effect from August 3,1998 through September 30,1998 with a cost ceiling of $13,884. The amount of $12,473 represents the total estimated reimbursable costs, the amount of $413 represents the cost of facility capital, and the amount of $998 represents the fixed fee for this task order.
Accounting Data for Task Order No. 3 is as follows:
B&R No.: 85-015-123-030 JC No.:
'J5220 BOC:
252A Appn. No.: 31X0200.860 Obligated: $13,884 i
The following individual is considered to be essential to the successful performance of
' the work hereunder: Dr. Goodluck Ofoegbu.
The Contractor agrees that such personnel shall not be removed from the effort under the task order without compliance with Contract Clause H.1 Key Personnel.
Your contacts during the course of this task order are:
Technical Matters:
Jayne Halvorsen Project Officer
{
(301) 415-6001 Q
Banad Jagannath 13 Tecnical Monitor (301) 415-6653 9909010213 900021 s'
PDR CONTR
(.
MtC-02-99-OO2 PDR z
{
Contractual Matters: Donald A. King Contract Specialist j
(301) 415-6731 j
i The issuance of Task Order No. 3 does not change any terms and conditions of the I
subject contract.
Please indicate your acceptance of Task Order No. 3 by having an official authorized to bind your organization, execute three (3) copies of this document in the space provided and return two (2) copies to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Attn: Mr. Donald King, ADM/DCPM/CMB3, hi.all Stop T-712, Washington, DC 20555. You should retain the third copy for your records.
If you have at,y questions regarding this matter, please contact Mr. King on (301) 415-6731.
Sincerely, O
hO Sharon D. Mearse, Contracting Officer 3 I Contract Management Branch No. 3 Division of Contracts and Property Management Office of Administration
Enclosure:
As stated Accepted:
O Name R. B. Kalmbach Director, Contracts Title August 21, 1998 Date I
b
E
]
y.
i l
l Attachment No. 1 TASK ORDER NO. 3
- SEISMIC REVIEWS FOR TITLE ll SITES
_ JOB CODE J5220.
NRC ISSUING OFFICE-
.NMSS l
~ NRC PROJECT MANAGER -
JAYNE HALVORSEN, 301-415-6001 NRC TECHNICAL MONITOR BANAD JAGANNATH, 301-415-6653 DOCKET NUMBER -
N/A TAC NUMBER N/A-FEE RECOVERABLE.
NO
'1.0
' BACKGROUND
. Uranium Mill sites under license after November 8,1978, are regulated under Title 11 of the b
Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act (UMTRCA), which amended the Atomic Energy
'. Act. The reclamation (closure) plans for these sites should meet the requirements of
! 10 CFR 40,~ Appendix A, which are, in part, that reclamation of Uranium Mill tailings sites be -
)
conducted in accordance with a plan which provides reasonable assurance of long-term l
stability, and does not rely on active maintenance. Reclamation plans should provide stabilized embankments that maintain control of tailings under the effects of seismic forces l
which could reasonably be expected to occur. Given recently updated site-specific Peak
' Ground Accelerations (PGA) for the Rio Algom Lisbon, UT, and Homestake Mining i'
i Company Grants, NM, sites, the tailings embankments' stability at these sites need to be confirmed. CNWRA worked on this task in FYg7, but could not complete it because of lack of needed site-specific information. This task is to complete the evaluation of the seismic istability of these two sites.
- 2.0 : Obiective j
l l
l
-The objective is to confirm the stability of the tailings embankments under updated seismic loading. The CNWRA had reviewed available information provided by NRC and found the information to be lacking in details. The NRC shall provide additionalinformation on the as-built condition of these sites. As these sites were licensed about 15 years ago, the available 1
documentation of the site conditions may not be very detailed. The CNWRA has to use all of the available as-designed and as-built information, and evaluate the seismic stability.
Participation in'a teleconference with the licensee to obtain inforrnation on the site may be required. When design parameters are not available, the parameters may have to be assigned on the basis of professionaljudgment and information from literature. A sensitivity L
analysis may be necessary tojustify the reasonableness of the assumed parameters and the
)
resulting conclusion on the stability of the tailings embankments. CNWRA shall provide a j
written, final evaluation.
l:
3.0 1 Technical Qualifications' Raouired o
The contractor shall provide the services of a geotechnical engineer who has the capability to evaluate PGA' effects on the uranium mill tailings embankment. Familiarity with the NRC Standard Review Plan is required.
1 1
n 1
Page 2 of 2 4.0 Level of Effort The total estimated level of effort for for the geotechnical engineering staff is approximately 122 hours0.00141 days <br />0.0339 hours <br />2.017196e-4 weeks <br />4.6421e-5 months <br /> and 40 clerical hours. This does not include time spent waiting for licensee responses or NRC and management reviews. The total estimated level of effort for this task is approximately 162 hours0.00188 days <br />0.045 hours <br />2.678571e-4 weeks <br />6.1641e-5 months <br />.
5.0 Period of Performance i
The entire task order effort will be 8 weeks.
6.0 Scoce of Work The contractor shall use the Final Standard Review Plan for the Review of Remedial Action of inactive Mill Tailings Sites Under Title I of UMTRCA, Revision 1, June 1993, and draft Standard Review Plan for the Review of Reclamation Plan for Mill Tailings Sites Under Title ll Sites of UMTRCA (1998), and other current design guidance, in addition to discussions with NRC staff, to:
1.
Evaluate the licensee's submittal on stability, including, as necessary:
- a. revised configuration (if any)
- b. previously-approved reclamation plan and as-built information
- c. relevant geotechnical data and construction specifications 2.
Perform sensitivity analyses, if needed 3.
Prepare a draft report for the embankment stabi!ity verification (similar to a model report to be provided by NRC staff) presenting the contractor's findings for the design, including whether or not the design meets the standard, needs to be justified or redesigned, or needs supporting data (specify which data).
4.
Finalize the report following NRC's review. The report should be provided as a hard copy, and in diskette form compatible with the Wordperfect 6.1 processing system.
7.0
.Meetina and Travel No travelis expected for this task.
I l
2 I
^U U.
~
~ ~ ~ - ~ ~ ~ ' ~ ~ ' ' ' ' ' ~ ' - ' ' ~ ~ " ~ - - ~ ~ ~ ~ ' ' ~ ' ~ ~ ~ ~ - ' ~ ' ' - - ~ - ' ~ ~ ' - - '
t Page 3 of 3 8.0
- NRC-Fumished Materials Final Standard Review Plan for the Review of Remedial Action of Inactive Mill Tailings Sites Under Title I of UMTRCA, Revision 1, June 1993, and draft Standard Review Plan for the Review of Reclamation Plan for Mill Tailings Sites Under Title 11 of UMTRCA (1998).
Embankment stability section of a Technical Evaluation Report (Title 11)
Embankment stability evaluation of a Title ll Reclamation Plan The above documents have been provided to CNWRA in connection with FY97 work for NRC.
9.0 Schedule i
See contractor proposal page 3-18.
10.0 Technical Direction Banad Jagannath is the designated Technical Monitor for this task. Technical instructions may be issued from time to time during the duration of this task. Technical instructions shall not constitute new assignments of work or changes of such nature as to justify an adjustment in cost or period of performance. Directions for changes in the scope of work, cost, or period of performance must be coordinated through the NMSS Project Manager and approved by the NRC Contracting Officer.
_ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _