ML19320D342
| ML19320D342 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 12/31/1978 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19320D340 | List: |
| References | |
| TASK-TF, TASK-TMR NUDOCS 8007210262 | |
| Download: ML19320D342 (26) | |
Text
!
l' l
l i
- ,?,i i.U j
e.
E C
G N NA S
M R
8 t
I 8
7 S
NA7 9
N R OE9 1
EOI Y 1 1
CFT 3
/
RAR I
/
R L E UA9 E
RP LD1 B
M OEAN6 E
TLVE7 C
CUEL9 E
AD A1 D
EE C
RH C
S
,/
3" i
'0 L
i
't l
AVERAGE LWA DURATIONS li (Months)
~!-
i Other i
Feiles.at Lscensints lielatial Total Duration NilC Conts ullawl l
I t
i 25 23 22 21 gg j
17 19 Target 17 Target 16 Target 16 t
.sss ss
's, x
14 13 13
=
i
f I
I AVERAGE CP DURATIONS 1.
(Months)
Ottier i
/
,, ;rdi Licensi,,9 Total Duration 43 NHC Cunitallag 40 g
i l
26 i
26 26
(\\
22 Target Target 23 Target stsw l
~
20 19 19 i
I.
)
AVERAGE OL DURATIONS l
(Months) l o,..,
' "' """""" ))
77 r a<...u.un,,N,
l
- 7c'~
l Fuel Load Fuel Load l;
Ready Ready L
5 Fuel Load i!
l 51 l
49 Ready 43
=
43 l
Target F//gf~
h 31 Target Target mm u
m 2s I
I I
6 O
AVERAGE PDA DURATIONS
~
(Months)
~
I
'n i'
h ottar Iti'i i k Toiai puration i
i nac Cooisullai l
1 i
I 25 o
19 20
//u p25 23 l
19 20 Target MMj Target
! 17 Target
! ll 15
=
'i 13 13 i
't s
t !i
\\
i
~
h Evaluation of Reactor Licensing Schedule Perfomance in 1976,1977 and 1978 4
Asstanptions, Definitions and Coments (1)
Duration data current as V.2/31/78 (2)
.Only first units of multi-unit OL applications are included in duration statistics I
(3)
OL review durations have no significance. OL applications often are submitted too early. Also an OL cannot be issued until-construction is complete. The only significant criterion is whether the OL was issued when the applicant and the facili'.y were ready for fuel loading. Time to Fuel Load Ready is time between docketing and plant ready for fuel loading.
(4)
All durations are rounded to the nearest whole month (5)
Target schedule is schedule duration established at review inception (6)
Duration identified as " Federal Licensing Related" is obtained by subtracting from the tetal duration those schedule delays, designated as "Other", which are not related to the Federal licensing process. Such adjustments include State and local pemit delays, applicant construction delays and deferrals, and applicant-initiated d eign changes. The resulting " Federal Licensing Related" duration is that which is attributable to the requirenents of the Federal agencies, including the NRC.
(7)
Duration identified as "NRC Controlled" is obtained by sub-tracting from " Federal Licensing Related" duration those schedule delays which are related to the Federal licensing process but are beyond NRC control. Such adjustments include court decisions, late applicant submittals and discovery of -
natural phenomena. "NRC Controlled" is the licensing duration which is the result of the Federal licensing proc ess and also is under NRC control.
It is the schedule perfomance parameter by which NRC may be judged..
p.~-,
.,,-s
.u v,
y e
ge re, nc--.--ee..,y e.,y---p.-y-w--.---.w-
,,-.iy a,
pe-y wp
-og w
e
n.--
'i t
i Schedule $mmary For Reactor licensing Actions Completed in Calendar Veer 1916 Averaue Durations in Manths 4
l ilne to Federal tIcensing MC Total fuel Load
,Actton Issued Schedule DuraLion Ready Related_
fontrolled No.
Target i
=
17 16
.' i tWA's issued 2(F) 13 21 f
26 22 CP's issued 4(9) 20 26
~
- OL's issw.d 1
31 51 51 36 32 i
e t
4 PDA's issued 4
13 19 19 11 8
0 4
e f
t t-Schedule baseary For Reactor Licensing Actions Consileted la Calendar Year 1977 i
Averace harations in M>nths Time to Federal Tatal Fuel Load Licensing MC No.
Target Related _
La,.4 trolled Actlon issued Schedule (Aratton Ready I
22 19 r,
25 f
IWA's issued 4(?)
13 I
34 26 LP's issued 8(15) 19 40 21 21 OL's issued 4
22 50 49
. 20 16
[
PDA's issueJ 4
13 20 t
t i
A
!. 8
.I e
Schedule Sunemary for Reactor Licensing Actions Cyleted in Calender Year 1978 -
Average brat ons In m Es_
~
~
l Time to Federal No.
Target Total Tuel Load Licensin9 INIC Action issued Schedule.
Duration lleady llelated Controlled.
IF 16 LWA's issued 2(4) 14 23
?
CP's issued 6(13) 19 43 34 23 i
OL's issued 3
25 43 43 29 27 li.
1 25 23 PDA's issued 2
15 25 i
, i i
t I
i k
?
e 1
L e
DETAI!.ED BACKUP DATA FOR SCHEDULE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION DECEMBER 31, 1978
,,---n A
a* ww -
w
=m-.
m.or-.
r M s' l
r Duration Evaluation - Major Causes For Delay (Durations in Months)
I.
tWA's issued in CY 1976 MC.
Target Total Federal Licensing Controlled Application Duration Duration Major Causes For Delay (Months of Delay)
Related Duration Duration Hartsville I-4 12 19 Late applicant responses (2)"
19 11 Extended hearings - heavily contested (5) 1 i
e t
therokee 1-3 13 22 Inadequate field data (8)*
14 14 Delay in initial decision by Board (2)
,s 13 21 Averages 17 16 Averages i
i r!
Subtracted fe:wn Total Duration to obtain Federal Licensing Related anu NRC Controlled Durations i
t Subtracted from Total Duration to obtain MC Controlled Duration I
i I
I i.
~1 5
11.
LWA's Issued in CY 1971 leRC Federal Licensing Controlled Application Duration Duration hjor Causes For Delay (Months of Delay)
Related Duration Duration __
Target Total I l')*
18 13 WP55 3 & 5 10 30 Awalting water quellty pemit J**
Court of Appeals Decision - Table 5-3 L11" i
I 1872 earthquale Board request for study on alternative d3J energy sources 30 25 j
Wolf Creek 14 30 Court of Appeals decision - Table 5 3
(
I Cooling lake review Hearing intervention I,
Phlpps Bend 1 & 2 12 18 Late applicant responses
( 3)"
18 15 1L k rble Hill I & 2 55 23 Staff lapact
( 3) 23 23 Entended hearings - hearing intervention 1, 6) 1 i
22 19 Averages 13 25 i i Averages i i f
i
{
i Subtracted fna Total Duration to obtain Federal Licensing Related and NRC Controlled Durations Subtracted from Total Duration to obtain NRC Controlled Duration.
t l
i
I I
i<
1
! i.
l i.
III.
{
i
?
t i
Nac i
Fedeial Licensing Controlled Target Total Applicatica A ration thsration Ms. lor Causes For Delay Deanths of Delas)
Related Buratlan Duratian Yellaw Creek l A 2 13 14 Late applicant responses (2)**
14 12 l.
Black Foz 1 & 2 15 31 Appendia I (2) 20 to i
Delay in obtaining water esse peralt (2)*
free city Applicant delays effecting (g)*
i environmental hearing
.t Iteopened hearings on Table 5-3 redon (4) 1 17 16 14 23 Averages Averages
~
I I
! l
/
1 I ';
Subtracted fien Total Duration to obtain Federal Licensing Related and MRC Controlled Durations subtracted from Total Duration to obtain NRC Controlled tius sion t
I i
t t
I
P IV.
CP's !ssued in CV 1976 NRC Federal Licensing Controlled Target Total Related Duration Duration _
Application Duration __
Duration Major Causes for Delay (Months of Delay)
I 4'i+*
28 22 Clinton I & 2 20 28 Seismic problems
( 2 Mark Ill containment problems i 2 t**
Late appilcant responses 19 19 Palo Verde 1-3 19 19 Mone (2) 22 22 i.
Callaway I & 2 20 22 Staff lapact Seabrook I & 2 22 36 Applicant delay in resolving open issues (12)**
3.
24 Extended hearings. heavily contested (3) l l
2.
,2
..e,a,es 2D
..e,.,e, t.
I 5
I e
4 Subtractegl from Total Duration to obtain NRC Controlled Duration i
I l:
^
l h!
V.
i NRC federal Licensing Controlled Tar 9et Total Appilcation Duration Duration Major Causes For Delay (Months of Delay)
Related Duration Duration
,3) 31 27 Wolf Creek 19 35 Staff layact i
Appendix I L3)
Table 5-3 1;4?***
Court of Appeals Decision State financial i,4,1 Reopened hearing requirement i
Cooling lake review (2) i
}
Sterling 19 38 Staff lavact i;)]
38 25 Appendix I (3'l
~~
Financial review - new appilcants added i 2,i**
l Late applicant responses 1,3J**
Table 5-3 i 3'l**
Court of Appeals Decision Impact of Seabrook decision on cooling L5j'*
,l towers
{
Tyrone 17 44 Late appilcant responses lF)**
32 20 3 year delay in construction start L4)*
(applicant requested schedule slip) j Financial review - new applicants added i 2**
ECCS reevaluation - calculational error f 3 **
l Chan9e from 2 units to I unttt environmental (8*
I impact
{
I Hartsville 1-4 18 29 Dpen GCSSAR ltens (12) 29 29 l
i St. Lucie 2 20 47 Delays due to intended duplication of Unit 1
( 6'l 47 45 Technical problem - stalled hurricane fl2'l i
Alternate site studies (4 l ECCS model problems - calculational error
( 2P*
Subtracted from Total Duration to obtain Federal Licensing Related and NRC Controlled Durations I
- Subtracted from Total Duration to obtain NRC Controlled Duration i
1 i
- 5
m.
V.
CP's issued in CV 1977 (Continued)
NRC Federal Licensing Controlled Tar 9et Total Related Duration Duration
. Application Duration Duration
- m. lor Causes For Delay (Months of Delay)
Alver Bend I & 2 16 42 Applicant delay fn resolving op m Itans iI2)**
42 22 4
i Appendix !
.ble 5-3 (6 > *
- Court of Appeals Decision t005 reevaluation - calculational error s 2 I" 35 18 Perry I & 2 19 46 Appilcant design changes
[Ilp**
fl6
[C05 reevaluation - calculational error (l 11p***
i, Late applicant responses I
Cherokee 1-3 20 43 Review stretchout due to delay in need (23)*
20 20 i
for CP 34 26 Averages Averages -
19 40
}
i Subtracted from Total Duration to obtain Federal Licensing Related and NRC Controlled Durations Subtracted from Total Duration to obtain NRC Contrulled Duration 1
l 1
)
i I
I 6
8 6 lEb
- a i i
VI.
CP's issued in CV 1978 IIRC I
Target Total Federal Licensing Controlled hyllcation Duraf< ton Duration lesjor Causes Tor Delay (ftonths of Delay)
Related Duration Duration __
i 5?"
28 23 7ellow Cred I & 2 19 28 Late applicant responses Staff impact
( 2J Generic issue (ALAB-444) responses 3,l WPSS 4 17 52 State requirements layacted financial
( 9)*
37 20 quellfications subal*tal 1812 earthquake LIFL ***
- 6, I
Site change Appendix I L 4,1
- 3 41 Ill I, 2;t*
Irr$5 3 & 5 19 44 Major plant redesign by applicant 1
1 ACRS delay - setselc review i
6 l**
ECCS model problem - calculational error 1812 earthquake 15;I**
Discovery of local faulting in escavation I, 21" l
I liarris I-4 20 76 Total project delay - applicant financial (12)*
39 27 l
probless
- 16,
}
9 i' pedesign of cooling system - State required I
Review reactivated - rereview required (7
e Resolution of hearing issues and re.
, 1 1
solution of fault Applicant delay Insdueltting information (12)**
on issues Phlpps Bend i 1 2 19 26 Appilcant appeal on seismology / hydrology (6)"
26 20 Subtracted from Total Duration to obtain federal Licensing Related and MRC Controlled Durations
" Subtracted from Total Duration to obtain NilC Controlled Duration e
t 0
4 a;a
',mk44*hw em eem 4
.deeJem_
>hMA+e.eum.-e-+#-,*NCN*-W-@2O@d &MWeh
- b@ M" g
O e
ae%
en
- ee me mmamma e
~
e +
e 8
4 1
5 Si 2
2 8w F-sis:2 m
x ilp wa 3
GC g
-~
+
A 1
2
=
2
.x 1
2 S
- t
}
.W?
I C
7383
~
~
I gS
.5 2
'8 8
E1.2 3
b 3{t 3
t-g-33 1
3 j
- E=,
- g w
&=
s.
7 E
4 2
44 I
I:
o3E-8 3$
u a
.M q@
s e 4 23 5
58iE hi E
E a2
=a
_1 I tt g
- 2
-O S
c a I
h.
N
.ee
>=%
-.e-eme
..ame.-me
,sw.
m
VII.
OL's issued in CV 1976_
1 I
NIIC i
Time to Federal Licensing Controlled Application Duration Duration iteady Major Causes For Delay (Months of Delay)
Related Duration Duration Total Fuel Load JJ Target i
Beaver Valley 1 21 39 39 Construction delays - materials. labor &
(12)*
27 27 I.
High energy line criteria - redesign (6) l !
weather g
necessary Construction deferred - financial (12)*
39 39 1
Crystal River 3 40 70 69
- problems 1 1*
Late applicant responses Construction delay - repair of defective P
I equipment High energy line criteria - redesign
( 6)
'~
necessary NOTE: ISAR docketed 40 months ahead of anticipated fuel load date Analytfcalanddesignchanges-( 3)"
36 20 St. Lucie 1 24 36 36 reevaluation of natural phenomena Design changes due to population growth (3)**
estimate changes Not responsive to resolving open issues L 9 **
ECCS reevaluation - calcula'ional error L1" Salem I 39 59 59 Construction delay - labor problems.
( 8)*
43 43 late equipment delivery Design modifications based on operating
( 8)*
experience and performance l
optialration - appilcant initiated High energy line criteria - redesign
( 5) necessary MUIE: FSAR docketed 39 months ahead of antl.cipated fuel load dates j
Duration to obtain federal Licensing Related and NRC Controlled Durations i
SubtracteJ from Total Subtracted from Total Duration to obtain NRC Controlled Duration l
l
i Vll.
OL's issued in CY 1976 (Continued)~
e i
NRC 1
line to Federal Licensing Controlled j
Total fuel Load TarYtion Duration Ready M
Major Causes For Delay (stanths of Delay}
Related Dura _ tion Duration _
j t
App 15 cation Dur l
[.
Browns Ferry 3 40 69 69 Third unit of 3-unit plant; review was completed when applicant was ready to
,l
}
load fuel; not included in duration averages Calvert Citifs 2 39 67 67 Second unit of 2-unit plant; review was completed when appilcant was ready to
{
load fuel; not included in duration averages Brunswick 1 30 47 47 Secondunitof2-unitplant(Unit 2was
{
completed and licensed first); review was completed when applicant was ready to load fuel; not locluded in duration averages 1
i E
N i
33 51 51 Amap Averages i
I i !
Subtracted from Total Duration to obtain Federal Licenslag Related and NRC Controlled Durations l
i i
Subtracted from Total Duration to obtain NRC Controlled Duration y Months between docketing and plant rea# for fuel loading 1
t
)
I t
i i
e 1
9 VIII.
NaC Time to Federal Licensing Controlled.
Target Total fuel Load
/
mjor Causes For Delay (MonthsofDelay)
Related Isration Duration y
Appilcation Duration Duration Ready North Anna 1 23 55 55 Construction deferred - financial problems (12)*
17 17 Construction delays - repair of defective i181*
equipment Labor problem f 21*
j I 6'l*
Mot responsive to resolving open items NP5H problem (2)
Highly contested hearing I, 7J i
84 84 Second unit of 2-unit plantt review was Cook 2 completed when applicant was ready to load fuel; not included in duration averages Davis Besse 1 20 48 48 Construction delays (183*
21 21 i
Late applicant responses I, 9f l
I 24 46 44 Construction delays - reduced need for (15)*
26 26 i j f
Farley 1 8
power; financial
/
Late appilcant responses
( 5li*
l Staff lupacts I,2j i
I 21 21 22 50 49 Averages Averages Subtracted f aun Total Duration to obtain Federal Licensing *Related and MRC Controlled Durations If Months between docketing and plant ready for fuel loading e
I e i
?
~
I e
I II.
OL's Issued in CV 1978 l
HRC Time to Federal Licensing Centrolled Application Duration Duration Ready 11 Major Causes for pelay (muiths of Delay) telated Duratten Duratten _
Target Total Fuel Load Arkansas 2 28 51 51 Core Protection Calculator (12) 32 32 t
Itevleu suspended - constriction
( 6)*
stretchout-Construction delays,non-CPC (13)*
t Hatch 2 -
22 31 31 Construction delay - financial
( F)*
22 22 i
problems j
Construction delays,other reasons
( 2)*
1 three Mlle Island 2 24 46 46 Construction delay. financial (12)*
M-N problems g q.. -
l tate applicantsesponses l }
Averages -
2g 27 Averages -
25 13 43 i
t l
Subtrated from Total Duration to obtain Federal Licensing itelated and IlltC Controlled Durattens Subtracted from Total Duration to obtain IIItc Controlled Duration U h ths betweea docketlas sad Plaat reads for feel loadlat' l
t.
G 4
e t
I
=
X.
PDA's issued in CV 1976
'?
's NRC i
federal Licensing Controlled q
Appilcation Duration.
Duration Major Causes for Delay (Months of Delay)
- Related Duration Duration _.
. Total i
. Target RESAR-35 12 17 Unacceptable RHR design - appilcant appeals (5)**
17 12 (3) 17 11 Braun 12 17 Staff lepact i
22 21 l'
f4)**
SE 55AR-RESAR-41 14 22 Open RESAR ltess and S W-9 interactions Containment design issues - applicant appeals (2
l i
Staff impact - policy development
(,
I
~
SESSAR-CESSAA 11 22 Staff impact - confilets with SESSAR-RESAR; (4) 22 20 i
' i.
SW-CE lateracto ans 5
i f 4.- spplicant re u ses - higher priorit/
(2)**
SESSAR-RESAR v.,
100iE: This case is somewhat analogous to a i
1 second unit of a multi-unit OL appilcation. Appilcant and staff efforts were simultaneous on large portions of this and SWE55AR-RESAR-4).
Emphasis was put where appilcant wanted
'. l it. Thus, this case not included in duration averages ig 11 Averages 13 19 l
Averages t
i Subtracted from Total Duration to obtain NRC Controlled Duration 4
i, 1
4
s.%
+-
1 i
i II.
PDA's issued in CV 1977 o
NRC j
Federal Licensing Controlled Total Related Duration Duration Target Appilcation Duration Duration h jor Causes for Delay (Months of Delay) 1 (3) 19 19
{'
Fluor 16 19 Staff cget ti 18 18 SWESSAR-RESAR 35 10 18 None I 9';**
25 i.
GESSAR-251 14 25 Late applicant responses ACRS delay ql ECCS reevaluation - calculational error i,3J**
' W -238 NSSS 12 17 ECCS reevaluation - calculational error (3)**
17 14 i
1 20 16 Averages i
Averages -
13 20 I
t l
t Subtracted from Totall Duration to obtain NRC Controlled Duration t
6 J
g ie2 4
.[
XII.
PDA's Issued in CV 19/8 i
l' NRC Target Total Federal Licensing Controlled gplication Duration Duration Major Causes For Delay (Months of Delay)
Related Duration Dura tion BSAR-205 16 27 Applicant late in responding to staff (4)**
27 23 requests Staff lepact (7) 4 RLSAR-414 14 22 Expansion of review scope - computer (8) 22 22 based protection system
)
i 25 23
+
Averages -
15 25 Averages t
t
/
4 1
i i ',
~ f
. s I i l
- Suhtracted from Total Duration to obtain MRC Controlled Duration i
3 I
1 e
0 e
i
'e l
i I
i
~
.