NUREG-0427, Discusses Reassessment of Reported Manpower & External Contractural Costs for Radiological Safety CP Review by Comparison w/man-yrs Recorded in NUREG-0427.Expenditures Considered Reasonable
| ML20197E603 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Satsop |
| Issue date: | 02/21/1980 |
| From: | Bournia A Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Varga S Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| CON-WNP-1287, RTR-NUREG-0427, RTR-NUREG-427 NUDOCS 8003120974 | |
| Download: ML20197E603 (2) | |
Text
4
~
3 REGULATORY DOCK 5T FiU. 00h c
Distribution: w/ enclosure:
f#~
k Docket File f
-(
LWR #3 File A. Bournia M. Rushbrook Docket Hos. STN 50-508 FEB 21 g s.
and STN 50g' 1
MEMORANDUM FOR:
S. Varga, Acting Assistant Director for Light Water Reactors, Division of Project Management p c6 THRU:
- 0. Parr, Chief. Light Water Reactors Branch No. 3,
{$pi:
Division of Project Management FROM:
A. Bournia, Project Manager, Light Water Reactors i
Branch No. 3. Division of Project Managenent
SUBJECT:
EVALUATION OF THE REPORTED MANPOWER AND EXTERNAL CONTRACTURAL COSTS FOR RADIOLOGICAL SAFETY CP REVIEW OF WNP-3 & 5 f,. ;,
As a result of Mr. Denton's letter of Januarymanpower expended on the radiological sa
.w 25., 1980 I reassessed the id.
obtained from the computer printouts covering the period from January 1,
,y -
1974 to November 24,1979, versus the period of December 7,1975 to q
November 24,1979 as reported in the January 25, 1980 letter. The manpower calculated from the printouts was 6.36 man-years.
I examined the 6.36 man-years, by comparing it to the man-years recorded in NUREG-0427, " Review of the Comission Program for Standardization of Nuclear Power Plants and Recomendations to Improve Standardization Concepts" for different types of CP safety reviews, i.e., custom plant, duplicate, l
,:].. replicate, and different standard plants (see the enclosed table. Table III-6 fromNUREG-0427). As noted from Table III-6 for custom plant CP's, the average
%. o safety review man-years was 6.3.
If the 6.3 man-years is reasonably accurate then the 6.36 man-years for WNP-3 & 5 would seem to be on the high side based on WNP-3 & 5 utilizing CESSAR. Further, if we compare the 6.36 to a CP application utilizing CESSAR, the CP review man-years totalled 6.0 (see l
Table III-6). Consequently, we conclude that the manpower expenditures as reported by the computer printouts are reasonable.
i The CP safety review for WNP-3 & 5 was perfomed by the staff; there were v
no external contractural costs.
Ogginal stgned byi AnthonyBournla j M* *.
Anthony Bournia, Project Manager O.
Light Water Reactors Branch No. 3 Y'
Division of Project Manan
.t g6/ 2.45 6
^
Enclosure:
l iapie a u-o from nunt u-osz/
LWR. g#3:DPMLWR. #.OPM orrice )
suanwe >
.ABournia/.LLM..00,arr..
.g g.
om>
2/f*/80,
,2/,3.,/80 2Ag /80 unc roau sie e,.m uncu eno Wu s novroAurut== intine nrrieri inue+-no
=-
i TABLE III-6 SUW.ARY OF INFORMATION Average Average Number of Safety Review Ouestions Man. Years Note Custom Plant CP 700 6.3 6 Applications Duplicate CP 300 3.2 8 Applications hi Replicate CP 350 4.5
=-
2 Applications R.
=
Nuclear Island CP 260 (840)*
4.4 (10.1)"
2 Applications k
570 (7251 6.0 (8.0) 4 Applications RESAR-41 CP 635 (1060) 5.9 (12.6) 1 Application CESSAR-238 CP 446 (527) 6.7 (7.7) 1 Application
- Number in Parentheses = CP Applications Questions + PDA Questions Number of Applicztions Number in Parentheses = CP Applications Man Years + PDA Man. Years Number of Applications e
i t
o
.