ML20049A189
| ML20049A189 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 05000000, North Anna |
| Issue date: | 05/08/1979 |
| From: | Capra R, Parr O Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML18017B573 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-82-91 NUDOCS 7906110328 | |
| Download: ML20049A189 (5) | |
Text
,
8 EVALUATIC't OF EE7 DEST FOR EXTENSIN. CF CONSTRUCT!0* PER M TS Y.)S. CPPP.-114 AND CPPP-11' FOR THE NORTH AhMA POER STATION, UNITS 3 AND 4 t
DOCKET h05. 50-404 A'.1) 50-405
[
INTRCOUCTION On Movember 21, 1978, the Virginia Electric and Powr Corpany (VEPCO) filed a request for an extension cf the latest construction completion cates for Constructf on Peraf ts CPPR-114 and CPPR-115 155ued for the North Anna Power Station, Units 3 and 4, respectively. By letter, dated Decester 15, 1978, we requested additfonal inforzation concerning the details relating to this dele. YEPC0 replied on Jar.uary 17,1979 with the nature and cause of slippage and the projected impact on the construction schedule for Units 3 and 4.
DISCUSSICM Construction Ferwits CPPR-114 and CPPR-115 were issued on July 26, 1974 with the latest construction completion dates of December 31,1976 and December 31, 1979, respectively.
In its application for extension, VEPCC requested that the latest con-struction completion dates for Morth Anna Units 3 and 4 be extended to hovember 1,1986 and Decer.ber 1,1987, respectively. VEPCO's current schedule calls for fuel loading in Fay,1983 and "pril,1984, respectively.
It indicated that there had been two rajor facters ccr.tribt tire to delays A L3 Ob7906 329 s A.
/
1
}
n.-
-. I l
1
.sar m w ne.S...sn os n.o
- ...e--.---....a..=--
I 2310 283,
L
a :
in ccnstruction activities up to the present tice: (1) 11 cited cor.struct1cn f'
funds and (2) a one year voluntary postponement in ccnstruction activities.
~
/cditionally, there are two areas which potentially could cause delays in the future.
The limited construction funcs that were available during the period March 1975 to March 1977 were diverted to North Anna Power Station, Units 1 and 2, in an attempt to cocplete these units as quickly as possible. The second source of delay was a one year voluntary post-ponement (Marct.,1977 to March,1978) in construction activities due to efforts at conservation and load management. The construction fund situation continued to limit construction activities froc Farch,1978 to the present time, because of increased operating and construction costs.
Potential delays are expected in the future, due primarily tc the unknow1 construction budget.
In February,1978, YEPC0 applied to the Virginia State Corporation Coamission for rate relief in the form of a $117 rillion surcharge. Only $82 million of this request was given tentative approval, pending a hearing. In April,1978, VEPC0 supplemented its application for a total permanent rate increase of $246 million.
If granted, this would have allowd increased construction to restme at the site for
'r.its 3 and 4.
A hearing or, tre application was held in Septerber,1978; 2310 284 i
l i
I i
i l
l l
l i.
....g I
l E-me man no w~ss nacu a:so
- s
~ ~ - ~ ~ ~ * * ~ ~ - ~
. ~a
l t
- 3 howver, no decision has been issued. At this t ire VE K G is no s r. e position to know either when a decision will be cace or what the cecisicn will be. Until it knows the outcos,e of its application, it is not possible to predict the full effect upon the construction schedule.
g YEPCO attributes additional potential delays to possible design changes necessary to conform with current regulatory requirecents. Itecs in this category are new Regulatory Guides and Branch Technical Positions which have been developed subsequent to the issuance of Construction Pemits for North Anna, Units 3 and 4, but which have applicability to these units. In a letter dated Movecber 21,1978, VEPC0 was advised of new regulatory requirements categorized as Category 2, 3, and 4 matters. Our letter described how these matters would be reviewd during the operating license review of North Anna, Units 3 and 4.
The potential impact on delaying construction is presently being evaluated by VEPCO.
The staff has reviewed the delning factors presented by the applicant, and concun that these factors have contributed to ur. expected delays in plant construction.
2310 285 CONCLUSION he have reviewd the inforattien provided in VEPCO's subesittai and we conclude that the factors discussed above are reascnable and constitute good cause for celay ar.d that an extensicn of Construction Permits CPPR-114 ar4 CPPD-115 fer a reascnable lencth cf tire is justified. towev er, base i
j f
i q
3:c resu ne ie *. sacx a2
- u
.p
.~.
j
{
'1
\\
F79 T
.'T
.T
.. ~
... ~. -...-- _..- -
- on the uncertainties involved in the pcter.ttal delays preser.tec em VEPCO's inability to fully assess or quantify their legact or. the construction schedule at this tise, it does not appear that a nearly eight year extension per unit, as requested, constitutes a reasonable length of tice. The staff interprets a reascnable length of time, in this case, to be the end of the calendar year in which EPCO's current schedule calls for fuel loading of Units 3 and 4, i.e., Deces6er 31, 1983 and [ecember 31, 1984, respectively. Since the fuel loading dates cay continue to slip in the future, due to the potential sources of delay discussed above, YEPCO may need to apply for an additional extension eventually; however, that application would not have to be flied until hovember,1983, at which time more definitive and detailed information would be known wh[ch could serve as a bases for extending the construction persits an additional length of time.
Considering the nature of the delays, we have identified no areas of 1
i significant safety consideration in connection with the extension of the construction completion dates for North Anna Power Station, Units 3 and 4.
The staff finds, that because the request is solely for more tire to canplete terk already reviewed and approved, no significant hazarcs censideration is involved in granting the request and thus prior pt.blic notice of this action is nct recuired.
Ide also find that good cat.se exists fcr the issuar.ce cf an Order extending the ccestructicn cm:leticn cate.
23]U 286 I
i, I
i c _,,,,,,, _.
_ _ _ ~.. -. _
s 5-Accordingly, issuance of an Order extending the latest ccnstructice.
completion dates for Nrth Anna Power Station, Units 3 and 4, as set l
forth in CPPR-il4 and CPRt-115, to December 31, 1983 and Decester 31, 1
1 1984, respectively is reasonable and should be authorized.
.c/
,v-Robert A. Capra, Project Manager Light Water Reactors Branch ho. 3 Division of Project Management
/5 Olan D. Parr, Chief Light laater Reactors Branch No. 3 Division of Project Panagement
.JJ 8, Igr79 Dated:
w 2310 287 C :.-
t A m.v /
- U.
- - tn 1*'
ue mnm ne ss s, ncu n.o
t f
... /.M :.' 4
. P;.
- Ai W ;;-c sf Thi ;il'5:0:4 GF SITE 31.FETf ::.', E!.V ::.C.FE:.!K A!.A. C. ;
RELATIVE TO A PROPOSED EXTEid51C:4 CF DATES FCR COMPLETICf. OF CO ;5TR' CTICri
?
J f40RTH AfillA POWER STATIO!i, Uti!TS fd0. 3 (CPPR-ll4) A 10 4 (CPPR-il5)
DOCKET fiOS. 50-404 AtiD 50-405 1.
The Proposed Action The action proposed is the issuance of an CRCER amending Construc-tion Pemits CPPR-ll4 and CPPR-il5 to extend the latest completion dates for fiorth Anna Power Station Units 3 and 4 to Cecember 31, 1963, and Decenber 31, 1984, respectively. At present, the latest construction completion dates authorized in these permits are December 31, 1978, ano December 31, 1979.
Virginia Electric and Power Company applied for an extcnsion of these dates by letter dated fiovember 21, 1978, and amended by letter dated January 17, 1979. The fiRC staff has reviewed the applicaticn and found that good cause has been found for the proposed extension (see attached Safety Evaluation).
2.
Environmental Impact f40st of the environmental impacts associated with construction of riorth Anna Power Station occurred during the impounc ent of Lake Anna and the ' Waste Heat Treatment Facility and during site de'eelop-ment for 'Jnits 1 and 2 and clearing of rights of way for transnission lines. As of January 1979, the licensee stateo that construc*icn of Units 3 and 4 was 7.0% and 3.7% complete. Excavations on site are essentially finished. Reactor containment liners and caissons for the turbine-generators are in place. Thus, the remaining on-site work will comprise erection of buildings and installation of equipment. Off-site, the only remaining effort is to finish right-of-way clearing for and construction of the transmission line from the station to Possum Point (see FES Fig. 3.21).
The environmental impacts associated with construction of L* nits 3 and 4 have previously been addressed in the Atomic Energy Ccmissicn's Final Envircrnental Statement (FES) dated April 1973 and the Atocic Safety and Licensing Beard's Initial Cecision dated July la,1974 Extending the constructicn cocpletion dates wculd snift some iroacts in ti e er serend tnem ever a longer seri:d. Water runcff fren constructicn areas acuk ce crolcnge:,
tut a staf f re-ter ccservec duri g a recent site visit inat tnt runcf' is being collected in a sacirentaticn :asin.
- n ac::rcance 2310 288
//C i
Ae qq &J;~ ac r~r.
k-w
2-
[
with requirenents of the State Water Control Board, ef fluents from the basin are monitored to assure that suspended solids are not excessive. The licensee also has a regular program of
~)
monitoring erosion and instituting control of such effects where necessary. Consequently, no significant adverse effects are expected because of the longer construction time.
3.
Conclusion and Basis for Negative Declaration W
On the basis of the foregoing analysis, it is concluded that there will be no environmental impact attributable to the proposed action other than those already predicted and described in the Commission's FES issued in April 1973 and considered in the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board's Initial Decision dated July 18, 1974.
c.,
Dated April 18 1979 2310 289 1
I s
l l
t
+
S d
e u
o emp=
4 f.E97:'iE ;ECL ARATI0r.
SUPPORTING ORDER PELAT!!4G TO THE EXTEtiSICf. OF DATES FOR CGMPLETION OF C0!JSTRUCTION i
NORTH ANNA POWER STATION UNITS NO. 3 (CPPR-il4) AND 4 (CPPR-il51 q
DOCKET NOS. 50 404450-405 The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Comission) has reviewed the Order relating to the extension of construction permits for the North Anna Power Station, Unit 3 (CPPR-ll4) and Unit 4 (CPPR-ll5), located in Louisa County, Virginia, issued to Virginia Electric and Power Company. The Order would authorize the extension of the dates for completion of construction of Units 3 and 4 to December 31, 1983, and
)
December 31, 1984, respectively.
The Comission's Division of Site Safety and Environmental Analysis has prepared an environmental impact appraisal for the Order and has concluded that an environmental impact statement for this particular action is not warranted because there will be no environmental impact attributable to the Order other than that which has already been predicted and described in the Comission's Final Environmental Statement for North Anna Power Station, Units Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4, published in April 1973, and considered in the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board's Initial Cecision datec 2310 290 July la, 1974 T
"D dus 6M m.
d
~h h'h^
r h-2 b j.
1 L.
l LL 9
.m w
4 The, envirevnental impact appraisal is available for public inspecticr. a-the Commission's Public Document Room,1717 H Street, tiW, Washington, ;;
and at the Board of Supervisors, Louisa County Courthouse, Louisa, '.*irgir.ia and Alderman Library, Manuscripts Department, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia. A copy may be obtained upon request addressed to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555, Attention:
Director, Division of Site Safety and Environmental Analysis.
Dated at Bethesda, Maryland, this 18th day of April
, 1979.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION A-Wm. H. Regan, Jr.
hief Environmental Projects Branch 2 Division of Site Safety and Environment:,1 Analysis l
2310 291 4
e
,