ML17296B057

Summary of 801028-30 Meeting W/Util in Buckeye,Az to Discuss Facility Const Status.Meeting Agenda & Attendee List Encl

ML17296B057
Person / Time
Site:	Palo Verde
Issue date:	11/06/1980
From:	Kerrigan J Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
NUDOCS 8011200350
Download: ML17296B057 (16)

Text

Docket Nos.

STN 50-528/529/530 C l c.'I I ""

~C-r-

@crau

%7 ffa

~ saba V1~~

m-Cll~

cia MQ7 ID APPLICANT:

Arizona Public Service Company FACILITY:

Palo Verde, Units 1, 2, and 3

SUMMARY

OF CASELOAD FORECAST PANEL MEETING AND 'SITE VISIT I

A meeting was held on October 28-30, 1980 in Buckeye, Arizona with the applicant to discuss the status of construction for the facility.

A tour of the site was made on October 29, 1980 to witness the status of construction.

The agenda for the meeting is shown on Enclosure 1

and the meeting attendees are listed in Enclosure 2.

The meeting is summarized as follows.

~Summar f

The applicant and Bechtel, the architect-engineer and constructor, made a

detailed presentation on the project schedu'1e.

For Unit 1, the current status of engineering is that specification awards are about 98 percent ccmplete and drawings are about 96 percent complete.

Procurement status is that about 92 percent of both piping and valves for Unit 1 have been delivered.

Overall percent completion of Unit 1 construction is estimated at 75 percent.

The anticipated problems identified by the Licensee are:

(1) availability of boilermakers (currently on strike),

(2) equipment qualification, and (3) implementation of TMI-related items.

The preoperational testing program was also discussed.

A detailed turnover schedule is available.

The first system will be ready to be turned over for testing in Hay 1981.

A pre-turnover testing program has been developed in order to meet, the applicant's projected fuel load date of November 1982 for Unit l.

At the exit interview held on October 30, 1980, we presented our current assessment of the fuel load date for Unit 1.

Based on the status and pace of construction, and comparing these aspects with those of similar facilities which have been or are being constructed, we projected that the most likely date for Unit 1 fuel loading is May 1983.

The Utility disagreed with the staff's estimate and requested that a follow-up caseload forecast meeting be scheduled for the first quarter of 1981.

The staff agreed to consider this request.

The Utility asked me what impact the staff's conclusion would have on the licensing review schedule.

I stated that, in my opinion, the licensing review would be impacted only slightly, if at all, because of the experimental OFFICE P SURNAME DATE$

NRC FORM 318 t9.76) NRCM 0240 OU.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE> 1979.289.369

'J 1

U ll

<<2 method being used in the PVGNS reviesr.

I stated that a larger number of system design reviews might be held because of the later SER issuance date.

/z J. Kerrigan, Project Manager Licensing Branch No. 3 Division of Licensing

Enclosures:

As stated cc:

See next page 1

OFFICE)

SURNAME DATE$

LB3:NRR 3 K

.iifQch 11 (g/80.....

Fair.

1l/..

0 NRC FORM 318 (9.76) NRCM 0240 4 U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1979 289'369

t E

I'S 4

F a

~

t f ~

I I

t 'I Ik 1 f<

I

]I rw'

NEETIffCi SUfll1AffY OISTftff3UTIOH A

Ay, Doc l'et F i 1 o NRC POR Local POR TIC/t'lS IC/Tera NRR Reading LBii3 Reading lf. Denton E.

Case D. Eisenhut P,.

Purple B. J.

Youngblood A. Schrrencer F. tliraglia J. Miller G. Lainas

'. Vollmer J.

P. Knight R.

Bosnak F. Schauer R.

E. Jackson y

A y,

OELO J.

Lee oiF. (3)

ACRS.(16)

R. Tedesco NRC Partici nants:

J.

Kerrigan M; Lovelace bcc:

Applicant'8 Service List Ci.

V.

S.

V.

z.

1J.

O.

R.

1f.

D.

P.

f<.

0.

F.

lf, H

R.

1'.

L.

T.

1f.

J.

S.

1t.

l.

O.

f"1.

ft.

C.

K.

(i.

A.

[).

J.

D.

P.

D.

Lear Hoonan Parvllcki ffonaroya.

Rosztoczy Haass.

tlul 1 er Gal 1 ard Regan

'oss Check Sa t ter fiel d Parr Rosa Butler Kreger lfouston t1urphy Rubenstein Speis Johnston Stolz llanauer.

GaIIImi 1 1 Schroeder Skovfrrrl t Errrs1:

13acr Be I'1 1n go r--- ~

Kniel Kn1 glI 1;orl TlIadanl Tondi Kramer Vassallo Col 1 ins Ziemann O

E

~,

Oy

)P zr I ~

, ~

I f

j (i

~p'%EG(g 0

Cy

~c 0O I

Op Vp I

+y

+0

>>>>*++

UNITEDSTATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, O. C. 20555 6 1980 Docket Nos.

STN 50-528/529/530 APPLICANT:

Arizona Public Service Company P

FACILITY:

Palo Verde, Units 1, 2, and 3

SUMMARY

OF CASELOAD FORECAST PANEL MEETING"AND SITE'VISIT A meeting was held on October 28-30, 1980 in Buckeye, Arizona with the, applicant to discuss the status of construction for the facility.

A tour of the site was made on October 29, 1980 to witness the status of

'onstruction.

The,.agenda for the meeting is shown on Enclosure 1

and the meeting attendees are listed in Enclosure 2.

The meeting is sumnarized as follows.

~Summar The applicant and Bechtel, the architect-engineer and constructor, made a

detailed presentation on the project schedule.

For Unit 1, the current status of engineering is that specification awards are about 98 percent complete and drawings are about 96 percent complete.

Procurement status is that about 92 percent of both piping and valves for Unit 1

have been delivered.

Overall percent completion of Unit '1 construction is estimated at 75 percent.

The anticipated problems identified by the Licensee are:

(1) availability of boilermakers (currently on strike),

(2) equipment qualification,=and (3) implementation of TMI-related items.

The preoperational testing program was also discussed.

A detailed turnover schedule is available.

The first system will be ready to be turned oyei'or testing in May 1981.

A pre-turnover testing program has been developed in order to meet the applicant's projected fuel load date of November 1982 for Unit l.

At the exit interview held on October 30, 1980, we presented our current assessment of the fuel load date for Unit l.

Based on the status and pace of construction, and comparing these aspects with those of similar facilities which have been or are being constructed, we projected that the most likely date for Unit 1 fuel loading is May 1983.

The Utility disagreed with the staff's estimate and requested that a follow-up caseload forecast meeting be scheduled for the first quarter of 1981.

The staff agreed to consider this request; The Utility asked me what impact the staff's conclusion would have on the licensing review schedule.

I stated that, in my opinion, the licensing review would be impacted only slightly, if at all,, because of the experimental

method being used i'n the PVGNS review.

I stated that a larger number of system design reviews might be held because of the later SER issuance date.

i f' J. Kerrigan, Project t>ianager Licensing Branch No.

3 Division of Licensing

Enclosures:

As stated cc:

See next p'ag'e

Y,r. E.

E.

Van Brunt, Jr.

Vice President

- Construction Projects Arizona Public Service Company P. 0.

Box 21666

Phoenix, Arizona 85036 cc:

Arthur C. Gehr, Esq.

Snell 8 Wilmer 3100 Valley Center

Phoenix, Arizona 85073 Charles S. Pierson Assistant Attorney General 200 State Capitol 1700 West Washington

Phoenix, Arizona 85007 David N. Barry, Esq.,

Senior Counsel Charles R. Kocher, Esq,, Assistant Counsel

'Southern California Edison Company P. 0.

Box 800

Rosemead, California 91770 Dr. Stanley L. Colins Assistant Director Energy Programs (OEPAD)

Office of the Governor 1700 West Washington Executive Tower - Room 507

Phoenix, Arizona

~ 85007 William Primm Assistant Attorney General Bataan I'.emorial Building Santa Fe, New Hexico 87503 Resident Inspector Palo Verde/NPS U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission c/o TTL/LGX Luke Air Force Base, Arizona 85309 Ns. Patricia Lee Hourihan 3530 E.

Howard Street

Phoenix, Arizona 85008 '

t

PALO YERDE 1

CASELOAD FORECAST PANEL SITE VISIT MEETING AGENDA ENCLOSURE 1

l.

Overview of project construction schedule including progress and major milestones completed since Caseload Pane) visit of April, 1979, current problems and any anticipated problem areas that may impact the cur rent projected fuel load date, 2.

Detailed review and current status of design and engineering effort (by major discipline) including any potential problems that may arise from necessary rework.

3.

Detailed review and current status of procurement= activities including. valves, pipe, instruments, cable, major components, etc.

4.

Actual and proposed craft work force (by major craft), craft availability, productivity, potential labor negotiations and problems.

5.

Detailed review and current status of all large a'nd small bore pipe hangers, restraints,

snubbers, etc., including design, rework, procurement, fabrication, delivery and installation.

6.

Detailed review of project schedule identifying critical path

items, near critical items, amount of float for various activities, the current critical path to fuel loading, methods=of implementation of corrective action foI any activities with negative float, and provisions for contingencies.

The estimated project percent complete as, of September 30, 1980.

7.

Detailed review and current status of bulk quantities including current estimated quantities, quantities installed to date, quantities scheduled to date, current percent complete for

each, actual versus forecast installation rates, and basis for figures.

(a)

Concrete (CY)

(b)

Process Pipe (LF)

Large Bore Pipe (2 1/2" and larqer)

Small Bore Pipe 2" and smaller)

,(c)

Yard Pipe (LF)

(d)

Large Bore Pipe Hanqers, Restraints, Snubbers (ea)

{e)

Small Bore Pipe Hangers, Restraints (ea)

{f)

Cable Tray (LF)

(g)

Total Conduit (LF)

(h)

Tot'ai Exposed Metal Conduit (LF)

(i)

Cable

{LF)

Power Control Security Instrumentatiorl "Plant Lighting>

Terminations (ea)

Power

.Control'

'Security Instrumentation Plant Lighting (k)

Electrical Circuits '(ea)

Power'ontr ol Security (1)

Instrumentation (ea')

8.

Detailed review and current status of preparation of preop test procedures, integration of preop test activities with.

construction

schedule, system turnover schedule, preop test

schedule, current and proposed preop test program manpower.

(a]

(c)

(d)

(e}

(f)

(h)

(i)

Total number of procedures required for fuel load.

Number of draft procedures not started.

Number of 'draft procedures being written.

Number of procedures approved.

Number of procedures in review.

Total number of preop tests required for fuel load.

Number of preop tests completed.

Number of preop'ests currently in progress.

Number of systems turned over to start-up.

~

~

9.

Detailed discussion of potential schedular'influence due to changes attributed'o NUREG-0660, NUREG-0694 and other recent licensing requirements.

10.

Site tour and observation of construction activities.

ll.

Discussion of.schedular impact, if any, regarding corrective action relating to Class IE, 600Y, power cable.

~

~

1 g

'I r

C h,

>a r

~

~,

~

~

f f

i,

,()"

j I

I

~

4c,

~

el. ~;

~

~

l

~use i r a+

~

~ '

~

~

~

Enclosure 2

MEETING ATTENDEES NRC CASELOAD FORECAST MEETING, October 28-30, 1980 NAME E.

E.

Van Bruntik B. Quinn J. Oiler W.

G. Bingham D.

B. Fasnacht M. Renner D. Paru K. Kieselbach W. J. Stubblefield A. K. Priest D.

Wood A. Gehr J. Kerrigan W. Lovelace C.

Boyd ORGANIZATION Arizona Public Arizona Public Arizona Public Bechtel Arizona Public Arizona Public Arizona Public Arizona Public Bechtel Bechtel Bechtel Snell A Wilmer NC NRC Arizona Publ ic Service Co.

Service Co.

Service Co.

Service Co.

Service Co.

Service Co.

Service Co.

Service Co.

~

I/

I

~

~

~ %

~

tI \\