ML19305A738
| ML19305A738 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | LaSalle  |
| Issue date: | 01/11/1980 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19305A732 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8002130128 | |
| Download: ML19305A738 (3) | |
Text
.
4 O
J:.N 4 y
STAFF EVALUATION REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF CONSTRUCTION PERMITS N05. CPPR-99 AND CPPR-100 FOR LASALLE COUNTY STATION, UNITS NO.1 AND NO. 2 DOCKET NOS. 50-373 AND 50-374 INTRODUCTION On September 24, 1979, the Commonwealth Edison Company (CECO or applicant) filed a request for an extension of the latest construction completion dates for Construction Permit CPPR-99 and CPPR-100 issued for the LaSalle County Station, Units No. I and No. 2 on September 10, 1973.
DISCUSSION In the applicant's application for extension of the construction completion dates for Unit I from March 31, 1980 to June 30, 1981 and for Unit 2 from December 31, 1980 to March 31,1982, CECO cited three reasons for the approxi-mate fifteen (15) months delay in the construction schedule. According to the applicant:
4 (1)
The construction schedule has been adversely affected approximately two (2) months by a strike and work stoppages. Moreover, the work stoppage resulted in significant skilled manpower losses, primarily in the mechan-ica.1 and electrical trades.
8002130 jg7
J 2 '4
- 1. ::; -,
t (2 )
The physical installation of downcomer bracing and T-quencher devices in the suppression pool will have a material effect on the construction schedule. These modifications are being made to comply to the staff's j
criteria defined in NUREG-0487.
The project will be delayed by approxi-i
]
mately eleven (11) months to install the bracing and T-quencher devices.
(3 )
Accommodation of additional staff's criteria in the area of fire protection and containment isolation testing, as well as expanded preoperational testing, contribute to the delay and the extension of construction activities. The project will be delayed by approximately two (2) months.
4 Conclusion We have reviewed the information provided by the applicant and conclude that j
the factors discussed above are reasonable and constitute good cause for delay i
and that extension of construction for the LaSalle County Station for fifteen i
(15) months is justified.
As a result of our review of the Final Safety Analysis Report to date, we
[
further conclude that this action does not involve significant hazard considera-tions and that good cause exists for the issuance of an Order extending the i
canpletion dates.
1 J
. Ac;ordingly, issuance of an Order extending the latest construction completion dates for the LaSalle County Station, Units 1 and 2 as set forth in CPPR-99 and CPPR-11, to June 30, 1981 and March 31, 1982, respectively is reasonable and should be authorized.
Y