ML19329A887
| ML19329A887 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Davis Besse  |
| Issue date: | 02/11/1975 |
| From: | Roe L TOLEDO EDISON CO. |
| To: | Case E Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8001150779 | |
| Download: ML19329A887 (5) | |
Text
__
~
NRC DISTRIBUTION FOR PART 50 DOCKET MATERIAL (TEMPORARY FORM)
CONTROL NO: /b N FILE:
FROM: Toledo Edison Company DATE OF DOC DATE REC'D LTR TWX l RPT OTHER Toledo, Ohio 43652 l
2-11-75 2-14-75 XX L E 'tce TO:
ORIG CC OTHER SENT AEC PDR XX Mr case one signed SENT LOCAL PDR XX CLASS UNCLASS PROPINFO INPUT NO CYS REC'D DOCKET NO:
X:CC(XX 1
50-346 DESCRIPTION:
ENCLOSURES:
Ltr notarized 2-11-75........reques ting an extention of their Construction Permit r -
(PPPR-GO) from June of 74 to April of 77
.......with justification..........
w/attch construction schedule......
PLANT NAME:
Davis 3 esse #1 FOR ACTION /lNFORMATION 2-19-75 ehf BUTLER (L)
SCHWENCER (L) ZIEMANN (L)
REG AN (E)
W/ Copies
' W4 Copies W/ Copies W/ Copies CLAR K (L)
STO LZ (L)
DICKER (E)
LEAR (L)
W/ Copies W/ Copies W/ Copies W/ Copies PARR (L)
V ASSALLO (L)
KNIGHTON (E)
SPELS W/ Copies W/ Copies W/ Copies W/ Copies KNIEL (L)
PURPLE (L)
YOUNGBLOOD (E)
W/ Copies W/ Copies W/ Copies W/ Copies INTERNAL DISTRIBUTION
~<87iEG Fit c ]
TECH REVIEW 0ENTON LIC ASST A/T IN D.
f emu ruri SCHROEDER GRIMES R. DIGGS (L)
BRAITMAN
/OGC, ROOM P 506A,, MACCARY GAMMILL H. GEARIN (L)
SALTZMAN
/GOSSICK/ STAFF KNIGHT KASTNER
,,J. GOU LBOUR NE (L)
MELYZ
/ CASE PAWLICKi BALLARD P. KREUTZER (E)
.,,-GI AM BUSSO SHAO SPANGLER J. LEE (L)
PLANS BOYO
,,STELLO M. MAIGRET (L)
/1CDONALDMA MOORE (L)
HOUSTON ENVIRO S. REED (E)
CHAPMAN f
D'cYOUNG (L)
NOVAK MULLER M. SERVICE (L)
DUBE (Ltr)
SKOVHOLT (L)
ROSS DICKER S. SHEPPARD (,)
E. COUPE GOLLER (L) (Ltr)
IPPOLITO KNIGHTON M. SLATER (E)
PETERSON P. CO L LINS
,,,.TE D ESCO YOUNGBLOOD H. SMITH (L)
HARTFIELD (2)
DENISE LONG REGAN S. TEETS (L)
KLECKER l
REG OPR LAIN AS PROJECT LDR G. WILLI AMS (E)
EISENHUT 1
/ FILE & REGION (2)
BENAROYA
-fA, /se o V. WILSON (L)
WIGGINTON T.R. WI LSON VOLLMER HAR LESS R. INGRAM (L)
(' ' ' '
STEELE 1
EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION
,1 - LOCAL PDR.Aer & Che fen, O M j
1 - TIC (ABERNATHY) ft)(2)(M - NATIONAL LABS AM 1 - PD R-SAN /LA/NY 1 - NSIC (BUCHANAN) f 1 - W. PENNINGTON, Rm E-201 GT J - BROOKHAVEN NAT LAB f
1 - ASLB 1 - CONSU LTANTS
' i - G. ULRIKSON, ORN L 1 - Newton Anderson NEWM ARK /BLUME/AG BABI AN 1 - AGMED (RUTH GUSSMAN) j1-ACRS Netet?TtWSENT Rm B-127 GT,
764..A 66Ul b ou o a 8.-
1 - J. D. RUNKLES, Rm E-201 GT 8001150J7p
A Q u l*
^
/ ^, '
ToLEoD
/ Y se ' w. g EDISON x
s LOWELL E. ROE Docket No. 50-346 j'
j Vice President a
{
a n.....o.. o.
~ai 9
\\,%
- (
(4191 259-5242 February 11,1975
[_
4 JA'f So-3%
L?
sir. E. G. Case, Acting Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
- E31 t/q ;,T United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
~
Washington, D.C.
20555 C;
l
Dear 31r. Case:
,, ~ '
Pursuant to Section 185 of the Atomic Energy Act of 195dYahiinIed, and Section 50.55 of the Commission's regulations published in 10CFR Chapter 1. the Applicants (The Toledo Edison Company and The Cleveland Electric illuminating Company) request that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission extend the date for completion of construction of the Davis-llesse Nuclear Power Station, Unit No.1, from the latest date currently stipulated in Construction Permit CPPR-80 (April 1,1975) and continue the Construction Permit to April 1,1977.
When the application for the Construction Permit for this unit was originally filed in August,1969, it was contemplated that the construction would be completed and fuel loading wo21d occur by June,1974. For a number of interdependent reasons the original schedule has not been realized and fuel loading is now scheduled to commence in January, 1976; the actual fuel loading dates could be later than this.
The related reasons for which the original schedule has not been realized include:
1.
Receipt of a Construction Permit was five months later than the original schedule allowed for, delaying work on the containment vessel which was not included in the Construction Permit exemption.
2.
The cor tinuing evolution of AEC requirements has resulted in design changes to assure that the unit is acceptable for issuance of an Operating License. Examples of such AEC imposed design changes are: inclusion of additional high-energy pipe restraints and asscciated building pressure relief panels to further enhance the integrity of the THE TCLECO ECISCN CCMPANY EDISCN PLAZA 300 MACISCN AVENUE TCLECO. OHIO 43652 1E;U
3
" safety equipment during faulted conditions; and reevaluation of seismic response spectra and design requirements as a result of a change during thu pre-license review in the seismic design criteria from 0.12g to 0.15g horizontal ground acceleration for the design maximum possible earthquake.
3.
Delayed availability of materials and equipment for installation has been experienced.
This is due in part to the complexity of the equipment; stringent quality assurance / quality control requirements; additional requirements of ASME code; the lack of basic material availability such as valve forgings, pump casing castings, and
-steel plate (particularly that associated with stainless steel tanks); and the lack of manufacturing space availability natic tally during the period. For example, valve deliveries of previously six months after order developed to twelve months and longer.
Equipment, such as the service water p;tmps, the auxiliary feed pumps, and the degasifier were twelve to eighteen months late in delivery causing varying delays in construction around the associated area.
4.
General unavailability of skilled craftsmen in critical areas contribute ~ te schedule delay and decreased productivity. In particular, shortages of qualified pipe fitters and welders existed, and continues to exist, at various stages during the project.
5.
Lower productivity than expected has transacted, due in pr.rt to cramped working quarters and to fulfillment of detailed quality assurance requirements. Rework resulting from design modification also contributed to lower productivity than originally expected.
6-The complexity of designing, procuring, and constructing a large nuclear unit has exceeded previous expectations, with a resulting lag in release of design / construction details in some areas.
Experience in constructing this ueit, as well as experience of the industry in general during this period, indicates that original schedule estimates were overly optimistic. The original construction schedule estimated fuelloading in June,1974, whereas the forecast presently details fuel loading'in January,1976, an eighteen month delay. The current construction time - for PWR facilities under construction (50-99% complete) is forecasted to be
- g
~
. approximately 75 months from ground breaking to commercial operation (Nov. 22,1974 issue of the AEC Yellow Book). The Davis-Besse construction schedule (see Enclosure 1) with the projected delay is 69 months from Construction Permit exemption to anticipated commercial operation and is thus consistent with those experienced in the industry in general.
Continuance and completion of the construction of Davis-Besse Unit 1 is vitally needed by the Applicants in order that adequate reserve margin be available for reliable service to the area customers and to conserve on fossil fuels, both coal and oil, which would otherwise be consumed to provide the required generation.
In view of the factors discussed above, it is therefort believed that the extended date for Davis-Besse Unit I construction completion described herein is realistic and the request for extension of the Construction Permit is justified.
Respectfully submitted, Lowell E. Roe Vice President, Facilities Development Sworn to and subscribed before me this //
day of February,1975.
-Lu/d.dwria Notary Publie g.,....y 7
'la. -.
..A
= - -l.
F
'4
...a.. - n C:.3 W Cc:--7::.r. L;:.n 02.10.1H7 l
l
Construction Scliedule - Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station - Unit I i<
Completion Date Milestone Event Original Schedule Actual / Forecasted l.
Site l' reparation 9-70 9-70 2.
Constniction Pennit Exemption 9-70 3.
Construction l'ennit issuance 10-70 3-71 4.
Installation of Containment Vessel Base Mat 9-70 9-70 J
5.
Installation of Sliield lluilding Foundation 12-70 2-71 6
Placing of Contaimnent Vessel Bottom llead Concrete I l-71 3-72 7.
Setting of Reactor Vessel 10-72 3-73 8.
Setting of Steam Generators 11-72 5-73 9.
Reactor Coolant System Cold liydro Test 1-74 5-75
- 10. Containment integrated Leak Rate Test 1-74 7-75 m
i 1. Ilot Functional Test 2-74 10-75 a
P-.
R
- 12. Fuel Load 6-74 1-76 c
N
- 13. Conunercial Operation 12-74 6-76 I
~