ML19276F554
| ML19276F554 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 03/20/1979 |
| From: | Ahearne J, Hendrie J, Kennedy R NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | |
| References | |
| REF-10CFR9.7 NUDOCS 7904060037 | |
| Download: ML19276F554 (42) | |
Text
~*
n NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
['
IN THE MATTER OF:
PUBLIC MEETING REACTOR LICENSING SCHEDULES
(
Place - Washington, D. C.
Date - Tuesday, 20 March 1979 P ag es1-4 2 et904060031 Te4echone:
(202)347 3700
' ~
ACE - FEDERAL REPORTERS,INC.
~
OffiaalReponers Lt.1 NcMh Cecitcl Street Washingten. D.C. OCC01 NATICNWIDE CCVERAGE DAILY
.a
~
~
- ra q
1 3507
(
.)
\\
.s.-
b
' ' io [
D 86t
/
DISCLAIMER s'
as This is an unofficial transcript of a meeting of the Unite
' Nuclear Reculatory Commission hetd on 20 uw lo7o Commission s offices at 1717 H Street, ii. W., Wasnington, 0. C.
sne i
,,ini s eransc_.19,.
meating was op=1.o uolic a'.'e=.n.d =nc= and o, servation.or edited and it may contain inaccuracies.
o c r has not been reviewed, corrac'=d..
' The transcript is intended solely for general infoma'tfonal purposes.
l or infomal rec rd of de$y 10 CFR 9.103, it is not part of tne Torma As rovidad ision of the matters discussed.
Expressions c, epinica in this transcript do not necessarily rerlec: rinal cetermanc ut ons o.
'io ol=~=di nc or o.5.ar r,-or m2/. b= 'iled-witn tne Commission
,,n b liefs s.
r---
any proceshin'c as the result of or addressed to any statement or argumen,.
contained herein, except as the Commission may authorize.
d g
T J
1-A r
g I
Mr"elon UNITED STATES OF AMERICA il 2 l!
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION il 3 >t l
COMMISSION MEETING Si on 6
REACTOR LICENSING SCHEDULES 7
8 Room 1130 1717 H Street, 9
Washington, D.C.
10 !
Tuesday, 20 March 1979 II The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:30 a.m.,
12 Mr. Joseph M. Hendrie, Chairman, presiding.
13 BEFORE:
I#
JOSEPH M.
HENDRIE, Chairman 15 RICFARD T. KENNEDY, Member 16 JOHN F. AHEARNE, Member 17 18 19 1 l
20 i l
21 22 23 l 24
.mi a.co,wn. ine. !
a 25 i l
l l
t.
4, I
I P_ R_ O_ C_ E E D_ I_ [{, G_ E iar*alon
.pbl 2
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Let us get started.
3!
We're here this morning for a briefing on the i
Idi reactor licensing schedules.
l 5'
I trust this is the morning, and then we cpen the 6,
papers and discover the arrows are from right to left, instead 7
of left to right.
8 (Laughter.)
9 MR. BOYD:
It could be you're holding your charts 10 !
upside down.
II Well, we've got quite a lot to cover since we 12 have a lot of arrows since we haven't had one of these meet-j 13 ings in a couple of months.
I I4 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Right.
So let's go ahead.
15 MR. BOYD:
Let me run down the construction permit 16 chart very quickly, if I may.
17 (Slide.)
18 A brief comment on Perkins.
The filings are due 19 !
momentarily and one would expect perhaps not a decision in l
20 l April, but certainly in the April-May time period.
21 I've mentioned the last two briefings about~ Erie 22 and Davis-Besse.
23 ll CEAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Oh, the hearing closed on....
24 'l MR. BOYD:
February.
ce W Reconm, Inc.
25 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
February 2, and we're getting I
3 Y
r l
mpb2 last, now --
2 l' MR. BOYD:
Findings of fact and conclusions of
'l
,c j
law being filed by the various parties which Mr. Yore tells 4
me is up March 20th, and then from that point on I assume --
5 MR. YO RE:
Well, the Staff findings are due on 6
March 20th, then the applicant intends to file rebuttal to 7
the intervenor's proposed findings.
That will be about ten 8
days.
9 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Am I wrong, or is that a fair-10 '
ly long time for filing of proposed findings after a hearing II I
like this?
Is there a specification in Part 2?
12 MR. YORE:
Yes, there is.
I believe it's 30 days j I3 for the applicant, and then the intervenors, and then the I
i Id Staff has an adciticnal ten days, and then the intervenor has 15 the right to fi.'.e final papers within a ten day period.
16 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
The Staff is rebutting; I7 are you telling me --
18 MR. YORE:
Proposed findings of fact.
They file l9 I proposed findings of fact.
All parties have to file proposed 20 findings of fact, and then the applicant has the final filing.
21 They're the ones that have the last word.
22 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
So it's 30 days, and ten dr.ys, 23l did you say?
2# !
MR. YORE:
It's ten days and ten days.
a wa: Reomn,Inc 25 '
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
And then ten days, or 50 days i
i I
l I
4 I
mpb3 down the line, that's about two months, and that's where we are.
k 2
All right, I just wanted to know how it all fit together.
3l MR. BOYD:
And normally those dates are agreed 4
upon by all parties as the final thing in the hearing.
l 5l CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
All right.
f 6,
MR. BOYD:
Let me go on, if I may.
I 7
The Erie and Davis-Besse we mentioned the last i
8 couple of meetings, these are two CAFCO plants that we're 9
reassessing the need for the power and the need for the plants.
10 '
I understand that reassessment is still going on, and we have no information on Davis-Besse, but I understand in the case of '
12 Erie that the applicant is in the process of moving the board ;
I3 to start safety hearings; no indication that I have as to 14 what this means vis-a-vis their overall project schedule.
But 15 I understand they are pressing for the start of the safety 16 hearings.
I7 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Now the hearings have gone on 18 in Davis-Besse 2, sir?
MR. BOYD:
No, sir, they have not started yet.
20 l COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
When you say reconsidering 21 the project schedule on Davis-Besse, what do you mean?
22 MR. BOYD:
The entire CAFCO net, which considering 23 I all of its power plants and the need for them, they delayed 1
24 !
Beaver Valley 2, they delayed a couple of coal plants, and they en eral Rooorters, tric.
oc' "i
have not yet come down with a decision on what to do on i
5 e
i I
mpb4 Erie 1 and 2, which of course is nuclear, and Davis-Besse 2 1
2 l1 and 3.
I 3l So the overall CAFCO region has made some decision i
4' on a number of plants, including nuclear, but not on these.
5 And they're still in the process, as I understand it, of 6
reevaluating the timing and needs for these plants.
At this i
4 7-point we have no firm information on when they're going i
8 forward.
9 I'd like to focus a little bit on Pebble Springs.
10 '
We've held it somewhat open in our schedule for quite some Il time.
The alternate site review has been controlling on this.
12 We hope to see it completed sometime in April, and we have a 13 safety supplement on a couple of matters to prepare, which 14 should not be limiting.
15 Our guess is -- we don't have it quite as firm as 16 a schedule, but we would imagine somewhere around July that 17 we oucht to be able to be pushing it forward toward a decision.
18 But I haven't got it blocked out as a firm schedule yet.
10 Skagit, the aext one down, we've also carried 20 l open.
It's, as you may recall, somewhat more complicated.
21 There's a specific seismic concern at the site.
22,
The applicant has been conducting a study.
He 1
23 l promised us the results of this study by about mid-April.
24 {
Considering the review that would be necessary and our eral R ecorte,s, Inc. j a
25 ;
work with the USGS, our guess is we ought to be able to get a i
i i
i
b i
I mpb5 supplement out sometime in the vicinity of October and 2
imagine then the hearing commencing again perhaps toward the 2
end of the year.
4' CEAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Clear till October?
5 MR. BOYD:
Yes, sir.
It's a tough issue.
6 CHAIRMAN HENDIE:
And when did you say you expect I
7 the Geological Survey to settle down?
8 MR. BOYD:
I did not say, sir.
9 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Is that the thing that's got 10 '
the thing up in the air primarily?
11 MR. BOYD:
I think that's a fair characterization.l 12 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
I don't know.
Is there any 13 way we can get them....
14 MR. BOYD:
I guess a lot depends on this April 15 filing, how definitively they put to bed the issues that got 16 '
us to this point.
Maybe after it comes in in April, maybe 17 in May we could reinform you and give you a better estimate 18 of the way it looks to be going.
19 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
What is the USGS doing?
an.
MR. DENTON:
They are our consultant in this 21 review; and the hearing had gotten pretty far down the road
" 'i l
when a different geologic hypothesis was advanced that could 23 ll not be reputed on the basis of the data available that 24 showed the much higher--
- s trat Reporters. Inc.,
25 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Advanced by whom?
i I
I i
7 s
mob 6 1
MR. DENTON:
Advanced bv intervenors.that showed l'
2 that a much higher SSE would be required for the plant.
2' So the applicant is going to back up a big program which i
4, he thinks supports his original view.
l 5'
But at the time after our own Staff and the USGS 6
reviewed the proposal we found it to require a sort of a look.
I 7
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
And what's the impact on 8
design if in fact the intervenor contention was correct?
9 MR. DENTON:
The plant, I believe, is --
10 '
MR. KELLEY:
Could be on the edge of a problem, 11 I think.
It may be a debatable point.
12 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Could we ask what are the 13 two estimates, the original estimate of the size th.at it should 14 be, the SSE, and the intervenor's contention SSE?
15 MR. KELLEY:
That's in fact -- depending on who 16 you're going to ask that, I think.the question of what the 17,
impact would be is quite little.
18 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Okay.
19 MR. DENTON:
I can put it another way:
1 20 !
They have bought I think a standard GE plant which 1
21 is designed for.3 or.35, and the contention would put it 22,
cver that substantially.
And so they're very interested in l
23 1 trying to demonstrate that --
i 24 !
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Do you have a rough idea, erst Reoorters, Inc. !
ca 25 !
.4,
.457 i
P i
t
8 I
mpb7 MR. DENTON:
No, I don't.
I 2
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
.5.
MR. DENTON:
They're rather committed to trying l
to use the plant that they've bought.
5 CHAIRMAN RENDRIE:
All right.
Any more questions?;
6 (No response.)
7 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Onward.
O MR. BOYD:
Pilgrim is, I think, coming down in 9
pretty fair shape.
We're anticipating -- we have the draf t 10 '
supplement on alternate sites out, we expect to publish the FES resulting from that sometime about the end of April, afterI 11 12 comments have come in.
3 The hearing focuses mainly on the question of i
14 alternate sites and the financial qualifications, which has 15 been completed and forwarded to the board and all the parties.
i 16 It's our estimate that the hearing should be able 17 to resume sometime in May.
IO CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Let's see, remind me, haven't 19 l there been some cases -- not this one -- but others for cps 20 in which the contention has been made that instead of consider-21 ing the plant at the site recommended, they ought to put it r
22 l! at Pilgrim because there's already plants.
I 23 l I assume that here the contention is that Pilgrim 24 !)l2 ought to be put someplace else, to make room for those plants arat Reporters, f ric. ;
m
'5 j that -- to be moved here from the proposed site?
I I
I I
9 I
I mpb8 (Laughter.)
2 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
No, no, to restore this 2
site to its pristine characteristics in order that it can be 1
4 j
reviewed properly for possibly moving the other plants there.
5 MR. DENTON:
This is one where --
6 CEAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Isn't that the way it works?
7 MR. DENTON:
This is one where we worked with CEQ 8
to try to minimize the delay associated with issuing a 9l supplement that dealt with alternative sites.
And they did l
10 '
come back with a proposal to us that met their guidelines Il and we're following their advice here.
12 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Ah.
I3 That reminds me, we've had a proposal about Id involving CEQ in trying to set out -- was that proposal on 15 1
alternative sites?
16 MR. DENTON:
No.
I think -- I'd recently proposed I7 one on alternative energy sources, but this one we dealt with 18 specifically on Pilgrim.
I9 I CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
I see.
20 MR. DENTON:
And they were very cooperative.
21 In fact, they resolved the differences between the parties.
22 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Okay.
23 l MR. BOYD:
I'd like to make a brief comment on 24,l Black Fox.
a nas nworms. sm.
25 !
The hearing has closed.
I've been telling you I
I i
I,
10 l
1 mpb9 over the last few months at our meetings that it was a very i
2 f; extended hearing and was going on and on.
It is over, and I
, '. l 3
understand we will probably now be in the period of filing I
4l and cross-filing of the appropriate papers.
5 Our target estimate, which we have no reason to 6
argue with at this point, shows a CP decision sometime in 7
August.
8 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Let's see....
i 9
i COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Why August?
l 10 '
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
If you closed in March --
11 we've done the environmental hearing because it was an LWA, l
12 r
and the safety hearing now closed March 1st.
l I3 MR. BOYD:
Right.
1 Id CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
So April 20th-odd gets to be 15 50 days.
And, let's see....
16 How long after the filings does one expect the I7 board to pull itself together, Jim?
There was a time it was 18 15 days.
l9 MR. YORE:
There was a time it was 15 days for an 20 uncontested case, 35 days for a contested case.
2I COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Let's start with the first I
22 of May, to make it round numbers.
23 [
CHAIRMAN HENDRII:
And we've proposed that that go 24 l to -- what?
a arat Reporters, Inc.,
'S '
i MR. YORE:
30 and 60.
'li I
11 f
I mpbl0 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
30 and 60.
2 So if it were 30, that would be May 20.
3 MR. YORE:
Well, that's an uncontested case.
This 4
is contested.
5 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
I see.
6 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
60.
i 7
MR. YORE:
60.
8 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
So it's June 20.
9 How come you're so pessimistic in targeting?
10 '
MR. BOYD:
I target my pessimism based on the next'.
II line of a rule of thumb, where there are one or two conten-12 tions and it's something I would describe as mildly contested,'
I3 but contested notwithstanding, then I think those numbers Id are rather reasonable.
15 '
But when it's a very complicated case that's gone 16 on in hearing for volumes and volumes and volumes, then I I7 frankly think trying to apply those standard numbers are 18 somewhat folly.
"I COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Well, you doubled them.
20 MR. BOYD:
In this case.
21 I could do it, it's no trouble in this chart to
'2 put July or even June, to put that little mark on there.
Then 23 '
I've got to come back to you sometime in the future and tell 24 you about a slip that just happened on Black Fox, and that 's i
3 ef al ReOOfttft, IrlC.
25 '
not quite right either.
i i
i
12 I
mpbli COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
He's giving you the best 2
estimate.
4 1 !
MR. BOYD:
I'm giving you the best estimate.
1
- i CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
I think he's trying to lay the I
Si basis to beat the schedule.
{
6 (Laughter.)
i i
7 MR. BOYD:
I want to run the arrows back one month '
8 then so we can brag about that as an accomplishment.
9 CHAIRAN HENDRIE:
Well, let's see, the board on 10 '
Black Fox, Jim, will the members have other hearing duties I
assigned to them?
12 MR. YORE:
Oh, yes.
l 13 MR. BOYD:
They do in fact now.
The chairman has I#
another board --
MR. YORE:
Allens Creek.
I0 ll MR. BOYD:
-- Allens Creek that's impacting in this l
17 l regard.
18 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
It would seem to me that 19 1 if that has any genuine impact on the date on which they could i
l 20 l actually reach a conclusion, I'd want to go back and look at 21 how we schedule board chairmen.
22 MR. YORE:
Well, these cases, they start out --
23 l CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
With difficulty.
It's impossible 24 to Oroject and figure how it's all going to come down the line.
so eral Recorters. Inc.
25 '
MR. YORE:
Because you look ahead and you try to i
i
1 13 I
mpb12 shape a schedule when there will be no conflicts, and then 2l there's always a complication that comes along and you're i.
1.
-1 bound to get some conflicts.
You try to minimize it as much 1
i 4'
as possible.
5 Now I don't think that Allens Creek is going to 6 !
be that great a -- I don ' t think daey 're ready to go to hear-l 7l ing right now.
But you can't assign a board and say You only l
8 have one case and that's all you're going to work on and 9
forget everything else.
10 !
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
And changing members at a stage U
like this is catastrophic.
I2 MR. YORE:
Ebrrendous.
13 MR. KELLEY:
Given a complicated case, wouldn't i
Id you pretty routinely -- the board pretty routinely grant 15 one extension to anybody who asked for it?
10 MR. YORE:
Sure.
I7 MR. KELLEY:
50 days in a complicated case -- I 18 think it's 75 days in the really complicated case any more.
MR. YORE:
Yes, you're right, in a really complicat-20 ed case; and Black Fox is complicated.
2I CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
They do have an LWA which 22l they've been running on since --
23 MR. BOYD:
- July, i
2# !
CHAIRMAN EENDRIE:
-- July, the end of July last a
af at Reoorters, Inc.
'S l summer.
So that at least here these days they go on to try --
1 i
14 I
mpbl3 Well, the board tries to gather its conclusions in hand 4
2 are a different kind of days from a practical standpoint than if the whole project were simplv sittinc anc waiting.
4l MR. BOYD:
If I could recall for you, in brief-l 5
ings of about six or eight months ago when we were discussing I
6, Black Fox, I pointed out that the utility was pressing 7
for some delay in the safety hearing until the environmental BI hearing was out of the way, they wanted to get the LWA first 9
and they couldn't do two things at once.
10 !
So they have been stringing this out to some extent.
It would have been possible to pick up some 12 efficiency in operation early on.
The utility was pushing 13 for something more sequential.
I#
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Okay.
15 Other questions?
16 (No response.)
17 Onward.
18 MR. BOYD:
Speaking of Allens Creek, we are I9 I showing a delay here, a delay of three months, which in fact 20 l may be of some hearing accommodation to Black Fox.
21 It has taken us, we feel, this additional time 22 for the preparation and dealing with the contentions and so 23 !
forth associated with the hearing.
l COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Who was that slip requested a
eral Reoorters. Inc.,
25 l by?
t i
i l
15 I
I mpbl4 MR. YORE:
May I fill in?
.I 2[
MR. BOYD:
Go ahead.
i 3l MR. YORE:
As far as Allens Creek, the board 4
made the ruling on 31 petitions to intervene, 31 petitions, 5
separate, petitions to intervene in that case.
l 6:
The Board made its ruling on February 9th.
7 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Were these from different i
8 parties?
9 MR. YORE:
These were different parties, 31.
10 '
The board granted the State of Texas a petition II and five groups, approved their petitions.
Eight petitions 12 they denied.
And they're on appeal to the appeal board right [
I3 now.
So the appeal board's got to sort those out.
I4 Then the remainder of the 31 were either consoli-15 dated or dropped out.
So that's the reason for this time 16 period.
I7 But that case evolved the largest number of 18 petitions, I think, one of the largest that we've ever had, i
19 )
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
I'm not sure why.
I don't l
- 0 l follow that.
There's a missing step for me in my understand-4 21 ing as to why all those petitions necessarily led to that 22l three month slip in the start here.
23 MR. YORE:
Well, the people have the right to 24 l i
appeal if your petition is denied.
a n.e neoomn. inc.
2 I
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Sure.
16 1
mpbl5 MR. YORE:
They have the right to appeal to the 2
appeal board, and they have the filing period for briefs, oral
,a
,1 argument, and so on, and that's where those are now.
I 4'
But meanwhile, the hearing can't start until those S!
are decided.
6, COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Yes, and you're slipping it l
7 into October.
And I guess you're saying that that's the 8
estimate of by the time the appeal board finishes making their i
9 decision.
And then you give enough time for those --
10 '
MR. YORE:
To move ahead for the hearing.
11 MR. BOYD:
And the Staff's SER is almost to the 12 point -- I would again remind you.that Allens Creek is a 13 i
reactivated review.
It had been reviewed by the ACRS before I#
and the ACRS elected not to review it again; and so we're 15 '
going directly to an SER right into the hearing.
16 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
The LAW was issued back in 17
-- I'm sorry.
I'll ask you later.
18 MR. BOYD:
Go ahead.
I'm finished right now.
I9 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Davis-Besse had an LAW
- 0 l issued at the end of 1975.
21 MR. BOYD:
Yes, sir.
3 22 i
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Has it affected that?
l 23 l MR. BOYD:
Not much.
Not much.
As a matter of 24 a
tral Reoorters, Inc.,.
fact, we found ourselves in a position where we could complete 25 l
the work back in '75, the environmental work, and issue an i
17 mpbl6 1
LMA, and we went forward and did so.
I 2
The utility, even at that point, was not all that 3l eager to have one.
But the work was done.
We went forward 4}
to do it.
5 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: I see.
6, MR. BOYD:
I'd like to make a minor comment, if I I
7 could, on Greene County, not necessarily on the schedule B
we're showing here; but there was a press release sent out 9
last week by the chairman of the board indicating that this i
10 !
Friday he was going to request from the other members of the.
Il board that effectively that the Greene County application be 12 withdrawn.
So we won't know how that comes out until Friday.
13 We would anticipate, based on the press release, i
1 14 no further activity on Greene County.
e 15 I always liked changing the subject to the next 16 unit down here and mention something about Palo Verde 4 and 5, 17 and to again point out we're doing this on an accelerated basis.
18 It still is on schedule.
The ACRS is scheduled for April.
I9 !
There 's a subcommittee meeting in about a week, I believe,
l 20 f As far as we know, we're still on schedule.
2I (Slide. )
22 Turning if I could to the operating license chart, 23 L in mentioning Diablo Canyon to start with, Diablo Canyon 24 I
hearing is completed.
The record is closed, as I understand
=
,,i neoo,m s.inc.
25 it.
And, as in a couple of other cases, we're going through I
i i
18 i
I mpbl7 the process of the various filings and the board's decision i
2 and everything.
And we're not anticipating this at this 3,
point until about June.
I 4
McGuire, next on the list, is a case where the 5l Staff work is complete, or essentially complete.
There was 6
a hearing on McGuire.
We have no board decision yet.
l 7
However, the utility is talking in terms of completing the 8
plant somewhere between July and October.
We showed --
9 although we don't show a slip on this chart, last month's 10 I chart did show a five month slip reflecting that slip in II cons truction.
I2 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Jim, do you know what the 4
I3 problem is on the board decision?
That's like six months.
Id MR. YORE:
I think the board will have that out 15 before that.
16 CHAIEMAN HENDRIE:
Well, it's six months now.
I7 MR. YORE:
No, the record was closed on --
18 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Labor Day, the first of I9 l September?
September, October, November....
I 20 !
MR. YORE:
Oh, you're talking about McGuire?
i 2I CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Yes.
22 MR. YORE:
Bob, when was the record closed on 23 l McGuire?
DR. LAZO:
I think this is correct, that it was erst Reoorten, Inc. l
.a m3 '
closed at the end of August.
There were many requests for i
nl l
19 I
mpbl8 extension on filing of proposed findings.
This is one of 2[
those complicated cases that the board is struggling with.
I 3
CHAIPJ1AN HENDRIE:
I see.
4 MR. BOYD:
There's also an ancillary hearing 5l associated with this on the question of spent fuel shipments 6
from Oconee.
It's not the same hearing, but it is the same i
7' facility.
And that, of course, is still open at this time.
8l CEAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Well, even considering a 9
complicated case, is five months getting -- five and a half I
I at this point; it seems to me to begin to --
11 MR. YORE:
I think that'll beat that....
I2 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
-- raise questions about whether I3 they'll ever be able to close it down.
I#
I was just going to note that apparently there is 15 not a special feeling of urgency because the projected 16 completion date at which point the~ operator could use an OL I7 if he had one is not until the summer.
On the other hand, 18 it's now getting to be closer from where we sit now to the 19 '
possible fuel load date than it was to the date the confounded l
20 !
record closed.
And I'm beginning, you know -- It seems to me 21 not unreasonable that if everybody gets one extension for 22ll filings and so on in a compliccted case, okay.
But it's not 0
23 I clear to me that as we sit here that it's necessarily gone
- l N-along in a very....
. r neoorters, inc. i
'5 l' MR. YORE:
Well, according to my record, the last I
i i
20 l
I I
i mpbl9 1 !;
findings were not submitted until December.
This is motions o
.td[
to reopen and so on.
d 3
CHAIRMAN HENDPlE:
That's three months.
4 MR. YORE:
Yes.
Not the period of August.
I i
$l mean, there were three motions to reopen the record, and the l
6 last findings were in in December.
i 7
Is that correct?
8 D ?.. LAZO:
Yes, sir.
9 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
And presumably the board is 10 i trying to pull its initial decision together now, I assume.
II MR. YORE:
That's right.
12 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
And it's been January, February, 13 and half of March thus far.
l i
I4 MR. YORE:
- Yes, i
15 l COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Jim, did the board chairman 16 l give you an estimate of when they will be ready with theirs?
I I7 !
MR. YORE:
Yes, when we meet with them.
IO COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
And what about this I9 !
particular case?
20 MR. YORE:
In this particular case, you have July.
21 I would say more like June.
It would be a more reasonable 22 target.
23 l COMMISSIONER AHEAR"E:
Is that what the board 1
24 chairman has estimated?
a mi neeorms. Inc.,
~5 MR. YORE:
Yes.
21 I
I mpb20 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
If he makes it, that will be 2h nine months from the close of the record.
MR. YORE :
But with di these motions in the interim period to reopen, they had to have briefs and filings 5'
on those motions to reopen.
So it's an extended period.
I 6
mean, that period you have here of August 31st is not a i
i 7
realistic one.
8, CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Periodically I find myself 9l saying with a silent prayer that it is indeed reflective l
10 '
of the fact of the Commission's regulations, procedural 11 regulations I guess in part too, are by and large adequate 12 to control this process.
But, you know, if indeed nine I3 months is not an unreasonable time under those procedural Id regulations from the close of record until the board can 15 l muster an initial decision, which after all still has to I
16 i stand the test of the appeal board and perhaps review of l
I7 !
regulations and who knows what, it seems to me that the 18 process, there has got to be, you know, a way to tighten that 19 up.
20 It simply can't take nine months to shn.e out 21 reasonable contentions, petitions, and get on to an initial 22 decision.
And if it does, then I think we've got a process
'3 I that doesn't meet the requirements of the day.
24 l I think it might be --
a stal Rmomrs tnc,
25 i MR. YORE:
Well, under the best of circumstances--
l l
21 mpb21 1
CHAIRMAN HF.NDRIE:
I think it might be useful, 2
Jim, for you to try to understand as we get on toward what 2l hopefully will be an initial decision by the board, what the 4
nature of the time spans were.
If the board has taken the j
5l view that there is 2 fair amount of time because the construc-6 tion isn't going to be complete and they're sort of targeting i
7 and looking ahead at when the decision does need to be in 8
hand, then I might grump about the conduct of the particular 9
case, but at least I wouldn't feel there was something 10 '
defective about the system, that the system is capable of II moving more expeditiously,with a little more'umph' under it.
12 But indeed if it turns out that the board has 13 moved along about as fast as the procedural system allows Id it to reasonably move, then all I can say is my God, you simply 15 have to be able to digest these pieces of business in better I0 than nine months after the close of the record.
I7 MR. YORE:
Well, I think there is a tendency on 18 the part of the boards if they see that the construction l'
isn't going to be finished for another six months or another 20 year, to feel that the urgency isn't as present there in that 21 type of case than where it will be completed next month.
22 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Yes, I can well understand that.
23 l That's why I said I'd kind of like to know whether the time 24 stretch has a lot of that in it, or whether it's --
a e,s Aeoonen.Inc..
25 MR. YORE:
I think partially it does.
I
a
~
23 i
l l
I mpb22 CHAIRMAN HENDRII:
Even at that, it stretches i
2 out the procedural for whatever is involved in it in ways d
3 that just don't strike one as being effective.
t
- l Onward.
i S:
MR. BOYD:
The next couple of cases don't involve 6
hearings.
They're a little tight, i
i 7
The Sequoyah Unit 1 will go to the ACRS ir Spril.
8 We just published the SER.
The plant should be constructed, 9
completed May we're showing.
The company I think now 10 '
estimates June.
So there is I think a comfortable margin II between finishing the review and being in a position to iss;ue I2 the license.
j I3 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
These are different data Id than are reflected in our chart.
15 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
There is a minus one that isn't-16 that cheerful on the one I've got.
I7 MR. BOYD:
Yes, exactly.
It wasn't cheerful.
18 Unfortunately the plant is slipping a little bit.
19 1 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Oh, dear.
20 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
If one has to look for good 21 fortune in the slippage of plants, one needs to reexa."ine 22 this process.
23 MR. L YD:
Except --
24 i CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
6/79 is what vou're....
- e oral Rooorters, Inc.
25 '
l MR. BOYD:
It's probably closer now to 6/79.
i t
24 I
mpb23 Even so, looking at that minus one, in the case of i
2 Cooke we went to the ACRS in February and were issued a license in February.
So it can be done, if it needs to be I
done.
And back to the case of Cooke, it needed to be done.
5 CC'MISSIONER AHEARNE:
What is the ACRS should 6 I say we have a problem?
7 MR. BOYD:
Then we'll have o take that advise 8
into consideration in making the decisions that we make.
i l
9 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
The Committee decides to have 10 '
a slow reading month.
11 (Laughter.)
12 MR. BOYD:
Their mission is to give advice to the l 13 Commission.
Id Salem 2 is, I think,perhaps even tighter.
We're going to the ACRS -- or we went to the ACRS in March.
And 16 the plant should be done March, or perhaps April.
So I guess, I7 as a matter of fact, it 's about in the same shape.
We ha.ve 18 a few minor loose ends to clean up.
And there shouldn't be 19 l any difficulty in being ready from a licensing standpoint 20 l l
by the time the plant is constructed, according tc the applica-21 tion.
22 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
North Anna you skipped over.
23 l It is in fact in the same situation.
i 24 i
MR. BOYD:
We're just wairing for North Anna
- s sral Reoorters, Inc,,
n.
construction to be complete.
l I
25 I
I mpb24 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
It has the operating l
a*
p license?
MR. BOYD:
No, no.
We took North Anna 1 and 2 together.
When Unit 1 was complete, we issued a license for I
5 -
Unit 1.
Now when Unit 2 is complete we will issue a license 6
for Unit 2 also.
7!
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
So there is no --
I i
8 MR. BOYD:
The hearing was for both units, the 9
ACRS reviews were for both units.
10 !
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
The proceeding is done and it's II l
just -- they have an OL but the Staff is holding on to it until they verify that the construction is complete and l
12 13 they're in fact ready to load fuel.
I4 i
MR. BOYD:
Well, not exactly.
I 15 '
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
You're skipping over Zimmer?
6 MR. BOYD:
I wouldn't want to do that.
I7 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
I would hope not.
I8 MR. BOYD:
We took Zimmer to the ACRS.
We have I9 an ACRS letter on Zimmer.
We would expect by the normal 20 l scheduling to anticipate a hearing starting in May.
21 The utility's estimate for construction completion, 22l he's talking in terms -- he~was talking July, he's now talk-23 li ing August.
On the basis of two reviews of the plant 24 't construction, we conclude it's more '.ike December.
c.i seconm. inc. ;
25 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
That's a very big difference.
i 1
l i
8.L
~
26 I
mpb25 What acccunts for the --
ll 2
MR. BOYD:
Not really.
In most of our construc-tion reviews by a case load forecast panel, the differences I
4' turn out to be on the order of a year, sometimes 18 months.
5!
In many cases eventually the utility comes around to that I
0 thinking.
i 7
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
This is five months away.
O CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Yes, this one's closing down.
MR. BOYD:
We have the same situation when we 10 !
come to San Onofre.
11 CHAIID AN HENDRIE:
The latest estimate that 12 our completion date that we have estimated is based on an 13 estimate made --
14 MR. BOYD:
About two months ago, I believe.
15 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Two months ago.
Well....
16 You've got two months slack in it.
17 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
When was the applicant's 18 last projection; May?
I MR. BOYD:
I guess the utility would argue that
- 0 he makes continuous estimates and that any time new informa-21 tion comes in he revises it.
This sort of estimate, going
'2 from July to August, if I recall correctly, was based on
- I ll 73 Ij something as mundane as the rate at which he's pulling cable.
24 '
And if the rate drops a little bit, he says Well, it's not
.a eral Reoorters, Inc. !
1 25 l
July, it's August.
i 1.
27 I
I I
mpb26 MR. DENTON:
Zimmer is one that is an example of 2f where we were quite concerned around December.
We put a d
3f lot of resources into ccmpleting the SIR, getting to the 4
ACRS, and that's why you find times like two months.
So we 5
try to balance our resources so that they'll apply to those 0
that are closest.
I 7
But then there's a gradual phasing out, and we l
t 6
have to reassess every month to make sure we're working on the' 9
plants which really are being built fastest.
10 '
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Yes, I understand that.
But that doesn't work here, if the applicant II I2 or the licensee estimate of completion is anything like I3 correct.
That's the reason for my question.
Id MR. DENTON:
Yes.
15 l COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
But so lor as our estimate 16 is correct, why, everything is just coming up roses.
I7 So I guess what we have to do is help them see 18 the light that our estimate is correct.
Is that what you're I9 talking?
20 l MR. BOYD:
Essentially that is the case.
21 Over the years we have argued, somewhat without 22 a good statistical base, that our batting average is much 1
23 !!
better than the utility, the individual utility estimates.
24 !
As I would argue it, and I have in some of the letters we've a
eral Reoorters. Inc..
25 l written on this, the utility looks at the earliest possible l
l i
l
28 I
mpb27 date, whereas we look at it more on a more nominal, more 2[
reasonable date.
^J Now we've been doing this forecast panel 4
systemmatic analysis now for two years.
And by next year, 5
or perhaps the year after, you'll have some good statistics 6
on what we estimated three years ago and what actually 7
happened.
We haven't had that systemization before.
We've 8
only had a gut feeling that we were right, because we turned 9
out to be right.
10 l I think with statistics we probably ought to be II I
in a better debating mode for this sort of thing.
12 MR. DENTON:
We do have limited flexil,ility to I3 expedite things at the last minute.
It seems li?.e Hatch 2 i
I4 l
or some plant started coming in much earlier than had been 15 thought, and we just --
16 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Well, here you don't I7 because of the hearing.
18 MR. BOYD:
Exactly.
MR. DENTON:
Right.
20 MR. BOYD:
The utility in this case can petition 2I the board for a fuel load license, a low power license, 22 anything is within his realm to do.
The board can, of 23 l course, react accordingly.
i 24 MR. DENTON:
So it is true that if there is a na arat Reoorters. Inc.
25 hearing schedule, we write the schedule such thau we produce i
i i
I
2.0 mpb28 l,
an SER much earlier in that case than we do if there 's no j
2[
hearing scheduled.
So we try to allot the proper amount of
'l 1,
time for each one depending on the individual circumstances.
I A
MR. BOYD:
There's another thing in here that 5
complicates it, this sort of matter.
If there is such a 6;
thing as a routine plant without a very difficult safety 7
question, I'm not sure that there is such a plant, but if i
8; there is, these schedules make some sense.
9 You can juggle schedules for this imaginary 10 '
plant, but plants like Zimmer and San Onofre 2, when we get 11 down to it, have technical features that are quite complicated' 12 and have required massive amounts of resources to complete a 13 review.
I4 Those schedules just stretch out the entire 15 review.
16 MR. DENTON:
But the goal is -- and I've told all I7 these applicants that we'll divert whatever resources there 18 are and lower priorities in this category up here as necessary I9 !
to get our review done on schedule consistent with their needs.
I 20 !
So I continue to pull people up from the CP and standard 21 review clans efforts in this area.
I 2' I MR. 30YD:
Okay.
23 !
I mentioned Salem.
i 24 nc Recomn. inc. j I'd like to mention, in the risk of flyinc 4n the 3
face of adversitv, San Onofre 2, which might look goud on the l
l I
30 I
mpb29 Ih chart, showing an ACRS meeting in August, a hearing in h
2 h January, and imagining the Staff's analysis that will be
, 1.i November, 1980, until the plant is complete.
The applicant's, I
- l on the other hand, view is that it's more like February of i
5l e80, some nine months sooner.
I 6l If in fact the hearing were to start in January 7
and completion were to be in February, the schedule would 8
not be a very meaningful schedule.
What we are doing in 9!
fact is meeting with the utility this afternoon, going over I
10 !
each and every outstanding item to get them resolved to our satisfaction where we can so that we can complete the safety I2 review, publish an SER, get to the ACRS cs soon as we can, 13 and as soon after that as possible, get into the hearing.
Id l
There is at least or.e technical issue, however, 15 I
which is probably controlling. t.lat in fact causes the i
16 schedule to stretch out quite a it.
I7 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Is that the seismic?
No, it relates to computer control 10 systems.
It's just controversial and we haven't seen it 20 l before.
It takes a whale of a lot of technical details to 21 wade through it.
22l COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Assuming at that time --
I 23 MR. BOYD:
There is, however, a seismic question.
24 '
I didn't want to infer that there were no seismic questions
,,.i n con.n. inc.,,
a 25 '
associated with this plant.
l l
I l.
31 I
mpb30 j
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Assuming that these ques-i 2
tions are -- can be resolved quickly, how far back, then, can 3
you move the ending of that hearing?
4 MR. BOYD:
We should be able to have a hearing i
5 within two months of the ACRS meeting.
6li COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Even on this schedule i
I 7'
you could move it back to October.
8 MR. BOYD:
Except for a controlling mode that 9
goes beyond the ACRS meeting, namely the review of our 10 !
computer control.
II COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
So that it's our review of I2 that issue that is the decisive factor as far as the I3 schedule.
i Id MR. BOYD:
It essentially is.
15 MR. DENTON:
Well, you may recall I mentioned 16 sometime the resources that you put into the review of your I7 system.
18 Which plant was that, Roger?
I9 MR. BOYD:
- 0 1 j
MR. DENTON:
And. tis applicant has not elected to 21 do it exactly the same way.
And there are some differences 22l in correlations and so forth that he wants to use.
If he had 23 l done it the same way our review would have been completed 24 :
for this plant essentially.
But he wants something different Jrse Reoorters, Inc.,
en 25 and we're accommodating thet.
But it's taking a lot of time.
f i
32 mpb31 I
MR. BOYD:
Don Vassallo advises me, in fact, that 2
the controlling stress out here is in fact seismic.
So maybe, Don, you ought to comment on that, on what's going on.
I 4j MR. VASSALLO:
The seismic issue is sor.?w'.at 5i complicated in the CP stage.
There was a lot of controversy 6
what the g value was to be.
i 7'
It was established, actually, by the board, i
8 finally.
9 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Remind me what it was.
I've 1
10 been out there and walked around and stared at the thing which II either was or was not an offset line.
I2 MR. VASSALLO:
Two-thirds.
13 In any case, at this particular stage we need a Id better justification in light of today's standards of how we 15 !
accept and review the seismology to justify what that design 16 basis is.
17 So it's not as though there's a new fault or 18 something found there, it's a question of assurring that this 19 is the appropriate g value.
20 l COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Are you saying that what 21 you're doing is to try to construct the reason of why the CP 22 1
board gave the correct value?
l 23ll MR. VASSALLO:
Well, it wasn't totally the board.
I 24 l MR. DENTON:
Let me try to say it.
.er31 Recorters, Inc. ;
er 25 ;
It was an issue at the CP stage, and the board i
i i
33 I
did make a ruling on the matter,
=pb32 i
i 2h Today we have a standard review plan in place and
,d
- l a standard technique.
We also require the Staff to document 4l the rationale for departure from the current standard revies 5
plan.
So what's what the Staff is saying:
Looking at it i,
6l from today's method what would you think of that and how would:
I 7
3' compare with the result of the CP stage.
8 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
What was the plant built at?
9 MR. DENT'sN :
Two-thirds g.
10 '
COMMISSIONER AF",ARNE:
I'm trying to think of 11 coming up with a method that justifies the board's results, i
I2 MR. DENTON:
It could be looked at that way.
We I3 have an inter-office memo that requires that we use the Id standard review plan on all OLs and justify the differences 15 i
that might arise.
0 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
You know, in justifying the I7 differences --
I8 MR. DENTON:
To see whether they are significant 19 l or not.
i l
20 1 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Yes.
21 Now in this case if the standard review plan came 22l up with a lower value, your justification would be why, 23 l nevertheless, was the higher value used?
t 24 l MR. DENTON:
I doubt if we would spend a lot of n i a.co m n,inc.'
24 '
effort justifying that.
l
34 s
=pb33 I
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
You just say that the design h
2h meets the requirement by a greater margin than was necessary.
3; MR. DENTON:
Of course, it was founded in part i
4!
by the experience we had in Diablo Canyon.
l 5
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Don, what you want to do is 6,
go and get the transcripts of some recent hearings I've been 7
at on the Hill.
There is a lot of great advice on how to do 8
seismic reviews to establish seismic standards, and you can 9
read it right into the record and that would solve a lot of I
10 problems for you.
II MR. VASSALLO:
Maybe I'll look at that and see if 12 we can get any help.
13 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
If that's what you're Id looking for, I don't think you can get it.
15 (Laughter.)
I0 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
I think a recurrence interval 17 of all 10 or 15 years would be ample in view of quite a fair 18 fraction of the people I've met recently.
So I suspect that I9 I they were probably grossly overdesigned out there.
20 l COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Joe, there is no General 21 Counsel here, but I suspect that you're slipping close --
22 (Laughter.)
I 23 MR. KELLEY:
Stop.
24 !
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Well, we'll know more on that a
nei seconm. inc.,
'S '
subject later, t
t l
l i
35 I
mpb34 (Laughter.)
,u
' i, CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
You reminded me, there is the
.i 9
office letter on OLs and standard review plans about which it
- j would be useful to have some discussion at some point.
I'm 5
not sure whether we're so deeply locked into carrying out all 6
of the provisions of that letter that it's impractical to 7
reconsider some of those provisions.
But it does seem to me 8
tha t the Staff in some sense with due deliberation fell on 9l its sword in that office letter, and it has been suffering 10 '
the wound ever since.
11 And I'm not really sure it's necessary or 12 appropriate.
And if we ever get to a period where we have 13 48 hours5.555556e-4 days <br />0.0133 hours <br />7.936508e-5 weeks <br />1.8264e-5 months <br /> without having to rush downtown, why, you might think Id about possible recommendations on change.
15 MR. DENTON:
One,.it comes up often and that 16 seems to get resolved, and then the problems of how to change I7 it are so overwhelming usually we let it lie dormant until I8 it runs into another snag in the. case.
And we have had I' l several meetings about should we update it or modify it on the i
20 !
basis of what we learned to date in trying to apply it.
21 It's eventually going to work itself into the 22 system.
I don't know when the first plant that comes back 23 through that's been reviewed on this point, we must be gerting 1
I close to the end of the plants that....
a erst Recorters, Inc. ;
2~8 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Do you have a sense, Roger, of I
i 1.
36 I
mpb35 many more OLs we've got to complete before we're out of the 2 h pre-SRP regime?
Everything on this list, certainly, and how
,d, many more?
i 4'
MR. BOYD:
I think it's everything on this list 5,
and everything in-house.
I can't -- for example, we have 6
another seven or eight OLs in the early stages of review.
I l
7' can't recall any of those truly being reviewed --
8 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Yeah, but then what back behind 9
that is in the pipeline?
10 '
MR. BOYD:
Probably another half-dozen to a dozen II that have been delayed in filing the FSAR.
12 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
So you're really saying I3 years.
Id MR. BOYD:
I think so.
O CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
All right.
16 Onward.
17 MR. BOYD:
Let me try to, in the few moments that 18 are left, summarine.
I COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
You're going to run by 20 {
LaSalle, aren't you?
21 MR. BOYD:
You'd like to hear about LaSalle.
22
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Just an exp. nation.
23 'l MR. BOYD:
Well, LaSalle is in about the same sort 1
24 '
of a situation.
It's another one of the olants similar Oc n.i aeoon m.inc.,
=
25 ;
i Zi=mer.
There is no hearing in LaSalle.
We expect to complete I
i
37 i
mpb36 Ij our review, write an SER in June, get to the ACRS in July.
2U Now the utility still maintains that indeed that's i
, !io about the time the clant will be constructed.
I i
4 COMMISSICNER KENNEDY:
We're getting awful close 5!
to that.
6 MR. BOYD:
Yes, sir.
7 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
And that's even a bigger i
8 difference than Zimmer.
i 9
i MR. BOYD:
But there's no hearing involved in this I
10 '
case.
II COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
So once the ACRS acts --
I2 MR. BOYD:
We can accommodate it.
13 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
You can act when the I
I4 construction is completed.
15 MR. BOYD:
Well, I think that 7/79 date is 16 inhumanly optimistic.
17 MR. DENTON:
I shouic point out perhaps that as 18 we get to this point of the rev.i aw under this completion, I&E I9 I is frequently on the scene.
We 've made frequent trips to the 20 site to check out details and the Staff and I&E have a 21 pretty good feel for exactly how far along we are.
22 l So I'm not really -- I tend to, as we get closer 23 to the end of construction, I tend to put more confidence in 24 ~
the estimates of completion that are coming out.
c.
se neoorms. inc.,
]*C !
COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Which ones?
i
38 I
mpb37 MP.. CENTON:
The Staff's estimates.
2 l:
When we're a long ways away, perhaps there could
, il.
be adjustments in the speed of production and so forth, but 4
when you visit some of the plants on a month to month basis 5
you sort of get a feel for the percentage of construction 6!
completed each month, and the Staff is able to give a fairly 7
accurate projection.
8 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
Okay.
9, I'm going to wait for July and see how it comes l
10 '
out.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
In some of these projects it 12 would be true that in order for the Staff's date -- if they're!
13 not correct, the applicant has to continue to maintain a Id completion date that is substantially earlier in order to keep 15 the pressure on.
And if he relaxes to the Staff's date, 16 recognizing Well, that's the real world we live in, the actual I7 one will promptly shoot out another three months.
18 MR. DENTON:
And during pre-op construction, it's 19 not uncommon to find unanticipated problems.
20 l (Slide.)
21 MR. BOYD:
here were scme accomplishments in 22 February.
We su=marized them on the next chart.
23 We did get out the SER 11 Zimmer with permits to go i
24 :
forward.
The SER got out on an accelerated schedule on Palo
=
,r.: s,eemn. ine. ;
25 '
Verde, and we did complete the alternate site review and get I
i
39 mpb38 1
the DES supplement out on Pilgrim.
We also got an FES out on 1
2N Greene County.
'I 1
3 (Slide.)
I In the next chart I summarize schedule slips.
I e
5 think I've discussed probably pretty well Pilgrim, Perkins, 6
Pilgrim again at the CP, and Allens Creek.
Those were the l
7 slips for February.
t I've indicated on the summary charts a number of 8
9 other plants.
I'd like to hit the final viewgraph.
10 '
(Slide.)
11 I'm showing this to give an overall summary of 12 Fiscal '79 scheduled licensing actions.
So f ar the limited 13 work authorizations stay as they have on construction permits.
I 14 Because of the highly contested nature of the hearing, Allens l
15 l Creek has dropped into Fiscal
'80, with the alternative site I
i 16 '
studies necessary.
New England has dropped into
'80.
And, as 17 I mentioned, on Green County it is to be withdrawn.
18 So although our initial assumption was for --
19 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Let's see.
20 When you said there is going to be a press release, 21 that was for whom?
22 MR. BOYD:
It has been issued.
It was to the i
l 23 I chairman of the board of PASNY, Power Authority of the State I
t 24 li e ! New York.
2 vat Reoorters, tric.
25 :
MR. DENTON:
The board is formally voting Friday.
i is
40 l
I mpb39 COMMISSIONER AHEAR:iE:
Did any suggest building 2p a coal plant?
, d.
MR. BOYD:
They suggested building a coal plant
- j at Athens and another one on the shore of Lake Erie.
There i
5 isn't that much shore of Lake Erie in New York.
There's a 6l little, but not much.
7 But anyway, our initial prediction --
8 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
That will cover up the 9-steel plant.
l 10 '
MR. BOYD:
Back in October 1st, we were assuming 11 12 construction permit decisions; so our synoptic estimate at 12 this point is nine.
I3 On operating licenses, we were assuming seven.
I Construction delay on Zimmer has pushed it into the next 15 fiscal year, in our opinion.
And on Diablo Canyon Unit 2, 16 which although I didn't mention it, has the same status it had 17 last month; the completion of all seismic modifications for 18 Diablo Unit 2 is now scheduled by the utility for June of
'80.
19 l PDA's that we're expecting, we have one of them 20 i i
out already, the other two are pretty well on schedule.
So i
21 l generally our overall projections for '79 at this point in l
22 time are standing pretty steady.
23 I have nothing more, unless you have any cues-24 '
tions.
- e.
.ral Recorters, Inc.
'S l MR. YORE:
I have a few words.
l I
41 i
i I
mpb40 I understand that Roger couldn't get along without i
, ll'g me, so we didn't have a meeting in January or February.
And this maintains my perfect attendance record.
I haven't missed a meeting for three and a half years.
My last meeting will 5
be May, and like Joe DiMaggio and Pete Rose, a'll try to keep 6-this consecutive series going for two more months.
I 7
I'd like to report to you on what's developed 8
since the first of the year with reference to new proceedings.
9 1
We've got ten new proceedings since January 1st.
A new I
10 hearing, a new proceeding on a construction firm, that's 11 New Haven.
The notice of hearing went out on February 9th.
12 This is a joint hearing with the State of New York.
13 Operating licenses, we've got a hearing board now 14 on Susquehanna.
We have petitioned boards in Comanche Peak, 15 Waterford, Byron and Braidwood.
16 Special proceedings, hearing boards now in I7 Zion 1 and 2 and North Anna.
This involves enlargement?of 18 spent fuel facilities.
19 l And then petition boards in Palasaides and Turkey 20 Point on steam generator questions.
i 21 So this makes a total of ten new proceedings
'2 since the first of the year.
I 23 l At this time I'd like to indicate to the 24 Commission that we have two full-time lawyer vacancies on a
ne n. con m.inc.J 25 '
the panel, with a third one coming up.
This is out of ten.
I i
i
42 J.-*
I
=pb41 We will have three less.
We're operating on a 70 percent
- i n'!
manpcwer ceiling, and this could create a problem as far as coverage of schedule of the proceedings.
I would just like 1
4l to mention this to the Commission.
<I j
With these proceedings coming up the way they are 1
0
-- it's true there are not many new applications for cps, but l
7 ten in two months gives you a pretty good feel for what is 3!
developing.
l 9l MR. KELLEY:
I guess now that the Commission has I
10 !
signed off on the screening panel, we should set another one II up and take various other steps.
I2 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
There are several vacancies, I3 and at least one of those is....
I I#
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
We ought to discuss that 15 in_the personnel meeting this afternoon.
16 MR. BOYD:
That's all I have.
I I7 CEAIRMAN HENDRIE:
All right.
18 Thank you very much, gentlemen.
19 (Whereupon, at 10:40 a.m.,
the hearing in the 20 l above-entitled matter was adjourned.)
I 21 l i
22 l i
23i i
24 h a.cornes, inc. j a
- r.
25 '
h i
.