ML19326D099
| ML19326D099 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Midland |
| Issue date: | 02/11/1977 |
| From: | Howell S CONSUMERS ENERGY CO. (FORMERLY CONSUMERS POWER CO.) |
| To: | Regan W Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| 1523, NUDOCS 8006060623 | |
| Download: ML19326D099 (8) | |
Text
NRC Frr.u 195 U.S. NUCLE AR REGULATORY ^~)MMISSION DCC
\\
NRC DISTRIBUTIO$ FOR PART 50 DOCKET MATERI AL TO:
FROM:
DATE OF DOCUMENT Consumers Power Company 2/11/77 Mr.. William H. Regan,,Jr..,
Jackson, Michigan DATE RECEIVE D Stephen H. Howell 2/14/77
%EfTER
,C N OTO RIZ E D PROP 8NPUT FORM NUMBER OF COPIES RECEIVED
- ~
__EOmG tN A L
~ [(C NC LASSIFIE D OCopy One signed OESClitPTION ENCLOSU R E
' ~ ~ -
Ltr. w/ attached....re our 1/27 /77 ltr. and their 2/7/77 ltr.... furnishing their "best approximation" regarding the "to-go" costs for completion of construction......
THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS -
POOR QUAUTY PAGES ACKNOWLEDGED
PLANT NAME:
(3-P)
D,_ O NOT REMQg Midland 1&2 o-ASSIGNED AD:
l AgqTnm n AD.
>JLRANCH CHIEF
- Varca X RnANm rmTev.
Younablood
-X3ROJECT MANAGER:
Powell Y PROJECT MANAGER:
Echols XLIC. ASST. :
Service V LIC. ASST _. :
Kreutzer
~-
INTERNAL DISTRIBUTION
_m
' EIREG FILE J SYSTEMS SAFETY I
PLANT SYSTEMS SITE SAFETY & ~
X NKU YUR HEINEMAN TEDESCO'
. ENVIRO ANATNSTS LXL&E
[f)
- SCHROEDER BENAROYAf X DENTON & MtiTTJR OELD IATNAq GOSSICK & STAFF ENGINEERING IPPOLITO ENVIRO TECH:
MIPC MACARRY KIRKWOOD ERNST CASE.
KNICHT-X BALLARD HANALER SIHWEIL OPERATING REACTORS SPANGLER.
HARLESS PAWLICKI STELLO SITE TECH.
PROJECT MANAGEMENT REACTOR SAFETY OPERATING TECH.
CAMMILL VBOYD ROSS EISENHUT STEPP P. COLLINS NOVAK SHA0 HULMAN HOUSTON ROSZTOCZY BAER MPETERSON CHECK BITTLER -
SITE ANALYSIS 2
MELTZ CRIMES VOLLMER HELTEMES AT & I BUNCH SKOVHOLT SALTZMAN J. COLLINS RUTBERG KREGER EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION CONTROL NUMBER
%1PDR: Midland. Mich.
NAT. LAB:
BROOKHAVEN MAT. T AB.
kTIC?
/
MNSIC:
/ [ 2, 3 k
~ASLB:
CONSULTANTS:
, /
.s""""""" U*
[
XlACRS 3 CYS BGEetN6/ SEbT f &. # f.2 // gar 2) p-NRCFrRM 196 0240D o
x
.s.
I 47 3 ConsunisrS e
P0Yl8T
\\,
{g Stephen H. Howell s
Vice President General of fices: 1945 West Parnait Road, Jackson,}M g
de 517 788 0453
- W oc sma u es
,o February 11, 1977 fy a
l j
7/
t
,,, i' 'p u.s. %
P
- (
0 bl.
4 g~ j
'O.
FEB1 1977 -
To, i ',.
, a(N /
2; u.s. Nucm ucuyLGI 6 @ co m sse x Mr. William H. Regan, Jr.
Co M 5 eda Chief Environmental Projects, Branch p
Division of Site Safety and g
Environmental Analysis US Nuclear Regulatory Commission k.
I8i0iy Decj.:ef gg 8$l Washington, DC 20555 MIDINTD FROJECT TO-GO COSTS DOCKET NOS 50-329, 50-330 FIIE: 0505.2 SERIAL:
3200 In your letter of January 27, 1977 you requested, among other things, that we supply you with the "to-go" costs to complete Unit 2 and the com=on facilities required for operation of Unit 2 only. In our reply of February 7,1977 we stated that we had no such nu=bers and that we were not able to develop them in the tilme that you had allowed for our answer. However, in the discussion between our representatives and your Messrs. Brenner and Hoefling in Chicago on February 7,1977, we were requested to provide you with ou: "best approxi-mtion."
We have developed such an approximation (see attachment) and an advanced copy was delivered to Lawrence Brenner, Esq. in Chicago on February 10, 1977.
However, you should keep in mind the preliminary nature of these figures and that they do not reflect the costs that would actually be incurred in con-structing Unit 2, and the common facilities required for Unit 2, as a single-unit plant, since they necessarily contain some Unit 1 common costs.
In order to develop the costs contained in the attachment, the cost of the process steam facilities was subtracted from the total common cost of the Plant and the resultant cost was then added to the specifically related costs for Unit 2.
This simplistic approach overstates the common costs assigned to Unit 2 due to the inclusion of the costs for facilities attributable to Unit 1, since some costs in common would not be necessary if Unit 1 is not built, but it is not possible in this amount of time to identify them.
i 1523
O
)
1 I do not know how you plan to use this information but I caution that any thought of suspending Unit 1 and proceeding with Unit 2 only has severe pit-falls; some that immediately occur to me are:
1.
Obviously the cost of Unit 1 will increase significantly due not only to the delay but also because of re-engineering required and interruptions in the construction sequencing.
2.
Obviously the combination of delay and increased cost makes the process steam that much less attractive to Dow, increases Consumers Power Company risks, and delays a permanent solution to the local air pollution prob-lems.
3.
Some of Unit 1 work will have to be continued in order to continue with facilities necessary'for Unit 2 because the Plant was designed and con-struction planned as a two unit Plant with integrated facilities.
1 Severe dislocation of craft manpower will occur since layoffs will be 4
necessary.
5.
Power required for Consumers' electric sys',em will not be available on time and may require purchased power at additional cost.
6.
This action would work against true energy conservation since the con-siderable efficiency benefits of a dual purpose plant are further de-layed.
Au2A O
SHH/KRK/fw
CONOUMERS POWER CoMPAI.T MIDLAND PROJECT Best Approxiraation Approach (x $1,000)
Total Estimate Expended to Date (12-1-76) 2-.to Estimate Unit II Unit II Unit II Description Unit I Steam
& Coenon
'Ibtal( }
Unit I Steam
& Common Total Unit I Steam
& Common, Total.)
Nuc1:ar Steam Supply System
$ 53,500 55,030
$ 108,580
$ 48,823
$ 49,516
$98,339
$ 4,727
$ 5,514
$ s 10,241 mrbine/ Generator 21,255 980 30,365 52,600 25,129 25,129 21,255.
980 5,236 27,471 Becht:1 Balance of Plant 262,195 97,020 602,605 961,820 41,6 %
12,170 146,746 200,612 220,499 84,850 455,859 761,208 Coniumera Iwer Co Directs 16,510 5,300 39,315 61,125 4,213 1,000 5,175 10,388 12,297 4,300 34,140 50 737 3
Consumera hver Co overheads 27,304 2,100 35,034 64,438 2,418 458 5,479 8,355 24,886 1,642 29,555 56,083 A11owanca for Funds 131.493 35,100 236,244 402,837 17,532 5,461 35.707 58,700 113,961 29,639 200,537 344,137 CP Co Misc Work orders 6,009 500 12,091 18,600 2,208 400 4,941 7,549 3,801 100 7,150 11,051 stal
$518,316
$141,000
$1,010,684
$1,670,000
$116,890
$19,489
$272,693
$409,072
$401,426
$121,511
$737,991
$1,260,928 Forecast I Furnithed by Bechtel DGR 2/10/77
1
~
i W
L PAG 1N P'
EJ ANO. svuouas NO. OF PAGES
\\
REASON:
O PAGE ILLEGIBLE:
OTHER l_
3 D BETTER COP ( REQUESTED ON
$PAGE100 LARGE TO RLM.g poR p sARD Cm arD 4t OTHER YOO80bObN FILMED ON APERTURE CARD NO.
-