ML20054E624
| ML20054E624 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 06/30/1982 |
| From: | Palladino N NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | Bevill T HOUSE OF REP., APPROPRIATIONS |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8206130068 | |
| Download: ML20054E624 (19) | |
Text
r-t 8
o UNITED STATES 8"-
1 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
{
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 g
%,,,,,+
June 30, 1982 CHAIRMAN The Honorable Tom Bevill, Chainnan Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development Committee on Appropriations United States House of Representatives Washington, DC 20515
Dear Mr. Chainnan:
This monthly status report is in response to the direction given in House Report 96-1093.
Enclosed is our twentieth report covering the period from May 15,1982 to June 15, 1982.
This twentieth report discusses actions that were taken during this period on operating reactors and on licensing reviews of new facilities.
Recently, a change in the construction completion date was announced by the utility for Grand Gulf (from May 1982 to June 1982).
On June 16, 1982, the Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, issued a low-power license for Grand Gulf, Unit 1.
Since many applicant construction completion dates have slipped,
the Comission has revised the decision dates for full-power licenses in Table 1 to be commensurate with the applicant's need for a full-power license.
The previous column in Table 1 titled Comission Decision Date has been replaced with two columns to reflect a Commission Decision on the immediate effective-ness of an Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (ASLB) decision and Comission decision on a full-power license.
Operating licenses restricted to up to 5%
rated power are nonnally issued by the Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, after a favorable ASLB decision.
On May 22,1982, the NRC issued a Final Safety Evaluation Report favorable to the restart of the R. E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant.
The plant restarted on Pay 22.
The Nuclear Regulatory Comission (NRC) is developing generic recom-mendations concerning the steam generator tube rupture problem as discussed in l
this report. The report also discusses current NRC actions on fire protection, the status of the Three Mile Island, Unit 1 and Indian Point hearings, and the actions taken by the licensees of plants with auxiliary feedwater header damage.
Sincerely,
&bbo Nunzio J. Palladino l
Enclosure:
NRC tbnthly Status Report to Congress cc: The Honorable John T. Fyers 206130068
r s
NRC MONTHLY STATUS REPORT TO CONGRESS This is the twentieth monthly status report to Congress in response to the direction given in House Report 96-1093. This report provides a discussion of major actions that were taken on operating reactors and on licensing reviews of new facilities during the period of time between May 15,1982 and June 15,1982.
TMI Unit 1 Restart The Special Master, who presided over the reopened hearing on the cheating
. issue, issued his decision on the matter on April 28, 1982 as reported last month. The decision, among other things, was unfavorable regarding the licensee's training and testing program and was critical of the NRC examination given to the reactor operators.
Comments and reply to comments from the parties to the hearing have been filed with the Licensing Board. The special Master's decision is pending before the Licensing Board.
As previously noted, the staff was undertaking actions to develop an environ-mental assessment on the effect of psychological stress on residents near TMI, as ordered by the U. S. Court of Appeals. The opinion issued on May 14, 1982 stated that in order to be cognizable under NEPA, the psychological health effects must be severe enough to be medically discernible. As a result of the opinion, the staff has requested the assistance of the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) in developing recommendations to the Commission on this issue.
1 l
The licensee's schedule for the completion of the steam generator repairs is unchanged from the previous report, that is, Fall 1982.
Subject to NRC approval for restart, GPU's estimates.of plant readiness would permit the return of Unit I to service near the end of the year.
Ginna The Ginna event highlighted the need for further NRC review of the generic steam generator tube issues. This review is based on operating experience including the three tube-rupture events which preceded the Ginna event, other operating experiences and the previous generic evaluations, including Unresolved Safety Issues (USI) A-3, 4, and 5 efforts, and will produce NRC recommendations with an implementation plan. The purpose of this effort is to minimize the degradation of steam generator tubes and mitigate the consequences of tube rupture events.
In developing the evaluation, scheduled for mid-summer 1982, the recommendations of earlier reports will be assessed. The recommenda-tions will relate to actions needed to address steam generator tube integrity, plant systems response to a tube rupture event, human f actors considerations, radiological consequences, and organizational response to the event. The current implementation plan includes consideration of public and industry I
comments on the draft report.
Fire Protection The fire protection rule (10 CFR 50.48 and Appendix R to 10 CFR 50) required that licensees submit by March 19, 1981 (1) plans and schedules for meeting the applicable sections of Appendix R, (2) any requests for exemption from l
sections of Appendix R, and (3) descriptions of design modifications to provide l
alternative safe shutdown capability, if such was necessary.
4
The NRC has responded to the requests from licensees for 28 plants for exemption from these schedular requirements.
These licensees demonstrated that the reanalyses of their plants for conformance to Appendix R required additional time.
Based on the previous reviews performed to meet the staff guidelines for fire protection and the resultant upgrading that has already been completed, the Commission issued exenptions granting the necessary time to a date no later than July 1,1982.
A condition was placed on each exemption that if the submittals were not complete by July 1982 that the licensee would be liable to civil penalty.
Similarly, letters were sent to all other licensees (16) who had not requested such schedular exemptions, but who had not completed all the details of their submittal s.
The letters required them to complete their submittals within 60 days or be liable to civil penalty.
The NRC staff plans to complete the reviews of all submittals by the end of this calendar year.
Auxiliary Feedwater Header Damage in B&W Reactor Plants The licensees of the affected plants, Davis-Besse 1, Oconee Unit 3 and Rancho Seco, plan to modify the design of the auxiliary feedwater header system in the steam generators to an external feedwater header design currently in use on the other operating B&W plants.
The licensees are still evaluating the installation and repair problems related to the drilling of the nozzle openings in the steam generator shell and internal shroud; and to the stabilization of the deactivated l
1 i
internal auxiliary feedwater header which will remain inside the steam generator.
The staff will review the resolution of these problems before restart, expected by the licen_ sees by about August 1982.
Indian Point 2/3 As reported previously, a pre-hearing conference was held on April 13, and 14. The Board identified the participants in the hearing.
In an April 23,1982 order, the Board set forth the contentions to be litigated based upon the submission of the parties and established the hearing schedule. The hearing began the week of June 21, starting with the contentions on Emergency Planning.
On May 18,1982, the Rockland County, N.Y. legislature voted to withdraw its participation in the New York State Emergency Response Plan for the Indian Point site.
The County Legislature's Resolution orders the County's two-man Office of Emergency Services to develop an independent plan for I
Rockland County by the end of 1982.
The probabilistic safety study which presents the licensee's evaluation of the risks associated with the operation of Indian Point 2 and 3, l
submitted to the NRC on March 5,1982, is currently under Staff review.
In support of this review, a site visit was made on June 2 and 3,1982.
OPERATING LICENSE APPLICATIONS Licensing Schedules l
l During the past month, the staff continued its review and processing of a number of operating license applications.
The present licensing schedule for all plants 1
with pending OL applications is given in Table 1.
Plants are listed chronologically according to construction completion dates. The Commission Decision Schedule is also shown.
The Immediate Effectiveness Decision date reflects the Commission's schedule to render a decision on whether to stay the effectiveness of the ASLB decision authorizing a license for full-power operation. The Full-Power Decision dates reflect the schedule for a Commission decision regarding a full-power license.
Operating licenses restricted to 5% power may be issued by the NRC staff subsequent to a favorable Board decision.
.The schedules shown for CY 1983 plants and beyond are based on standard assumptions for review and hearing times, except for those plants that are expected to be heavily contested (Seabrook Unit 1, Byron Unit 1, and Midland Unit 2).
For those plants, the projected schedules allow for approximately 13-months (rather than the typical 11-months) for the hearing phase, from issuance of the Staff Supplemental Safety Evaluation Report (SSER) to Commission decision date on a l
full-power license.
The staff review process for those cases has been accelerated to compensate for the additional time allotted for the hearing process.
The estimated regulatory delays and the target dates for Commission decision shown in Table 1 do not reflect any potential impact from the schedules for FEMA findings on off-site emergency preparedness.
Any additional potential delays, based on the staff's analysis of the schedules for the FEMA findings, are included in a monthly report to the Senate Subcommittee on Nuclear Regulation, which is transmitted l
jointly by the NRC and FEMA.
l
On June 2,1982, the Washington Public Power Supply System (WPPSS) tendered an operating license application for'WNP Unit 3.
The acceptance review has begun.
Unit 3 is now approximately 53% completed, with fuel loading scheduled for June,1985.
The schedule will be added to Table 1 subsequent to docketing the applicati,on.
Recently, a change in the construction completion date has been announced by the utility for Grand Gulf Unit 1 (from May 1982 to June 1982).
On June 16, 1982, the Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, issued a low-power license for Grand Gulf, Unit 1.
PLANT-BY-PLANT DISCUSSION OF DELAYED PLANTS The only plant presently projected to have a regulatory delay is Shoreham Uni.t 1.
Although Diablo Canyon Unit 1, San Onofre Unit 2, Midland Unit 2 LaSalle Unit 1 and Grand Gulf Unit i do not have a projected regulatory delay, they are included in the discussion due to other causes.
1.
San Onofre Unit 2 - The NRC issued an operating license on February 16, 1982.
It wa.s restricted to 5% power in accordance with the ASLB decision.
Fuel loading ha's been completed.
The startup test program is in progress.
The test program schedule has slipped about two weeks since fuel loading, due to a variety of minor hardware problems, such as repair of leaking RCS check valves, replacement of pump motor bearings and leaks in hydraulic and ai r systems.
Due to a recent failure in RCP seals, the licensee has tentatively slipped intial criticality to July 7,1982.
On May 14,1982, the ASLB issued an initial decision authorizing the issuance of a full-power operating license f6r San Onofre Units 2 and 3 subject to certain conditions relating to emergency planning deficiencies.
Authorization of full-power operation for Unit 2 is. currently projected for late July 1982.
2.
Diablo Canyon Unit 1 - On March 19, 1982, the staff accepted Teledyne Engineering Services as the manager for the independent design verification program. The NRC staff approved the Phase 1 plan on April 27th.
An audit of the quality assurance program, including implementation, of PG&E and of seismic service-related contractors, has been completed by R. F. Reedy as a Teledyne subcontractor.
The conclusions of this audit raise questions as to the adequacy of the PG&E quality assurance program in other than design activities.
- Teledyne, as program manager, will issue an appraisal of the Reedy report.
Teledyne will also issue an appraisal of the activities of the Phase 1 program. A management meeting between PG&E, Teledyne and NRC took place on June 10, 1982 at Waltham, Massachusetts.
The staff has under consideration the question of expanding the scope of the reverification program required of this unit prior to fuel load. A decision on this issue will be made before currently ongoing activities in the Phase I program are completed. Detailed semi-monthly status reports of the program activities are being issued by PG&E, Teledyne,' R. L. Cloud Associates, and R. F. Reedy, Inc.
3.
Shoreham Unit 1 - The hearing started May 4,1982 and is expected to continue I
well into the summer and fall of 1982.
Currently there are about 40 open items,17 which relate to hearing issues. On June 11, 1982, the Commission approved a final amendment concerning Emergency Planning to 10 CFR 50 and Appendix E.
The rule provides that for the issuance of an operating license authorizing fuel loading and operation to 5% of rated power, no NRC or FEMA review, findings, and determinations concerning the state or adequacy of the offsite energency preparedness shall be necessary.
The rule also specifies that energency preparedness exercises are part of the operational inspection.
l l
The exercise must be conducted prior to operation above 5% rated power but is not required for any initial licensing decision process.
The Licensing Board is attempting to ' resolve all matters except those re-lated to offsite emergency preparedness issues and issue an initial decision regarding authorization of a license for fuel loading and operation to 5% of rated power by December 31, 1982. Based on the applicant's current official estimated completion date of September (which the staff judges to be optimistic by at least 3 months), this projected schedule could result in a licensing impact of about three months.
4.
Midland Unit 2 - The Midland SER was issued in May 1982.
An ACRS meeting was held on June 4,1982.
On the basis of these two milestones, the first Supplemental SER (SSER) is scheduled for July 1982.
Concurrent with the OL licensing effort, a series of ASLB hearings relating to the soils settlement problems are being held.
An ASLB Memorandum and Order was issued on April 30, 1982.
The staff is taking appropriate action to require the applicant to obtain explicit prior NRC staff approval before proceeding with soils-related activities.
l S.
LaSalle Unit 1 - On April 17, 1982, a fuel load and a low power testing license was issued to Commonwealth Edison Company (licensee) for LaSalle Unit 1.
The licensee initiated fuel loading on April 18, 1982, and completed fuel loading by April 30, 1982.
Hydro testing of the vessel, integrated leak test of containment, and single rod scram testing are c
compl eted.
The licensee has initiated its Mode 3 (shutdown above 212*F) l startup testing.
However, they have encountered leakage in check valves and are trying to rectify the problem.
i
- A 2.205 Petition and an Amendment were received from the Attorney General of Illinois making allegations of poor construction work.
A second Petition was received from the Illinois Friends of the Earth making similar allegations._ A meeting of all parties was held on June 2 at the NRC's Region III office, and additional alle-gations were made.
Operation of the f acility beyond startup testing up to zero power will not be authorized until the NRC review of the allegations is completed.
6.
Grand Gulf - On May 8,1982, a former Containment Systems Engineer for General Electric wrote to Mississippi Power & Light (MP&L) expressing his concerns as an individual about potential safety issues related to the Grand Gulf Mark III Containment design. A meeting was held on May 27 in Bethesda with MP&L, General Electric (GE), Bechtel and the engineer.
A number of other Mark III Owners and others also attended the meeting.
MP&L presented a response to each of the engineer's concerns (e.g., pool swell, safety related discharges, RHR heat exchanger, pool temperature and Drywell bypass leakage).
The engineer was given the opportunity to give his views.
On June 8,1982, MP&L submitted a formal appraisal of the applicability of these concerns to Grand Gulf. The NRC staff has concluded that none of these concerns would adversely affect plant safety during fuel loading and operation up to 5% power. MP&L plans to submit a program plan to demonstrate the margins and conservatisms of the Grand Gulf design by July 16 and a justification for operation over 5% power by August 19, 1982. A license restricting operation to 5% power
was issued on June 16, 1982. Operation at higher power may be authorized after the NRC review of the licensee's August 19th submittal.
(
Several actions were discussed to determine applicability of.these concerns for the other Mark III containments.
At the meeting, the engineer expressed some concern about the Kuosheng Mark III plant located in Taiwan regarding the location of certain structures located over the suppression pool, drywell flooding, and pool mixing.
7.
Summer 1 - The ASLB initial decision for Summer 1 has changed from 5/82 to 7/82.
The applicant currently estimates construction completion on July 15,1982.
If the ASLB decision is delayed beyond this date, the plant may be impacted.
j Construction Permit Applications On March 2,1982, Duke Power Company requested cancellation of the CP applica-tion for Perkins Units 1, 2, and 3 without prejudice.
A Board decision is pending.
On April 9,1982, the lead applicant for Pebble Springs Units 1 and 2, Portland General Electric Company, withdrew its application.for a site certificate from the State of Oregon, and requested cancellation of the scheduled alternate sites hearing by the NRC.
l On December 31, 1981, Puget Sound Power & Light Company submitted an amended Environmental Report and a Preliminary Safety Analysis Report (PSAR) amend-ment reflecting a relocation of the proposed Skagit/Hanford Nuclear Project (S/HNP) to the Hanford Reservation.
The site relocation Draft Environmental Statement was issued in April 1982. The Final Environmental Statement is scheduled to be issued in August 1982. The staff is currently reviewing j
the PSAR amendment, and a Safety Evaluation Report Supplement is scheduled to be issued June 1982.
l
. Clinch River Breeder Reactor The Clinch River Breeder Reactor (CRBR) plant applicants are currently pursuing a Limiteo ;hrk Authorization which, if granted, would authorize the applicants to begin site preparatibn following the completion of public hearings on environmental and site suitability matters.
Based upon the submissions of the parties to date, the Licensing Board anticipates that litigation of outstanding issues can be completed in time to pennit the issuance of a decision on a limited work authorization by December 1982.
The NRC staff is currently reviewing the radiological health and safety aspects of the CRBR plant, as well as assessing the environmental impact of the changes that
.have occurred since its FES was issued in 1977.
The' update will be issued in early July.1982.
The presiding Atomic Safety and Licensing Board has ordered that the public hearings commence on August 24, 1982.
A prehearing conference was held on April 20,1982 to discuss the scope of safety issues for the Limited Work Authorization phase of the hearing. A deposition session was held May 6,1982 to respond to intervenor interrogatories.
The staff met with the ACRS on May 4-5 on May 24-25 and on June 1 regarding the CRBR safety review.
j i
On May 14,1982, the Department of Energy (00E) requested reconsideration l
of Commission action denying the DOE request for exemption.
On May 17, l
1982, the Commission rejected the DOE request for reconsideration. The basis for the original rejection was lack of justification regarding public interest considerations.
Tables 1.
Licensing Schedules for Pending OL Applications 2.
Licensing Schedules for Pending CP and ML Applications
/
g 5'
ce
-1 sf,-
,t g
e l
4 4
9 4
s f
l
/
I
./
a 1
s s
[
\\
e l
q' r.
\\
~ /
).
)
e, J
I t
/
i t
t 1
I t
/
1
?
f j
d TABLES
/
t T
e
/I l
v 1
5
DIVISION Cl LICENSIT~. 6/10/R2 1ABLE I Licensing Sched-iles f<r All Pcwding OL Applications (Page 1 of 5)
(includes Schedules for Addillonal Units with Projected Construction Completion in CY 1982-1983)
(Listed in Order of Projected Comission Decision Date)
SER SSER C e Decision -1/
Est Staff Staff ASL8 Appl.
Plant (Months)
DES Input to OL SER Mtg FES Input to DL SSER
~7/ Start of Initial Cowa.
Constr.
Delay issue Technical issue ACRS Issue Technical issue Hearing Decision Eff.**
vet.***
Comp 1.
Srn Onofre 2 02!
C C
C C
C C
C C
C 06/82 06/82 2/ 02/82 LaSalle 1 02/
C C
C C
C C
C None None N/A 06/822f 04/82 Grand Gelf I O
C C
C C
C C
C None None N/A 08/82*l7/ 06/82 17/*
Summer 1 0
C C
C C
C C
C C
07/82
- 07/82 08/82* 18/ 07/82 Susquehanna 1 0
C C
C
.C C
C C
C C
07/82 08/82* 18/ 07/82 Otablo Canyon 1 04/
C C
C C
C C
C C
07/82
- 08/82
- 4/
Diablo Canyon 2 0 4_/
C C
C C
C C
C C
07/62 *
-08/82 *
- 4/
Shrrchen 1 33/
C C
C C
C C
C 10/
C 10/
03/83 10/* 03/83 10/* 03/83 10/* 09/82 St. Lucie 2 0
C C
C C
C C
C None None' N/A 09/82
- 10/82 San Onofre 3 0
C C
C C
C 7/01/82 08/01/82 C
C 06/82 10/82
- 11/82 Palo Verde 1 0
C C
C C
C C
C C
10/82 11/82 11/82 11/82 13/
CESSAR 0
N/A C
C C
N/A 8/01/82 8/30/82 None None N/A 11/82 N/A 16/
Zimmer 1 0
C C
C C 8/
C C
C C
06/82 07/82 11/82
- 12/82 19/
Waterford 3 0
C C
C C
C C
C C
09/82 10/82 12/82
- 01/83 LaSalle 2 0
C C
C C
C C
C None None N/A 12/82*
01/83 McGuire 2 0
C C
C C
C 12/01/82 1/01/83 C
C C
03/83 04/83 SUS-TOTAL 3
Indicates changes from last repert
- Coviission decision on effectiveness of ASLB decision
- Locunission dect:lon on full-power license i
~ -
DIVISION UF LICENSING 6/10/82 TABLE I Ltctnsing Sctwdults far All Pcndtsg OL Appilcations (Page 2 of 5)
(includes Schedules for Additional units with projected Construction Completion in CY 1982-1983)
(Listed in Order of Projected Consulssion Decisionlate)
SER SSER Conan. Decision -1/
Est Staff Staff ASLB Appl.
Plant (Months) des Input to DL SER Mtg FES
- nput to DL
$$ER -7/ Start of Initial Comen.
Constr.
Delay Issue Technical Issue ACRS Issue Tet.hnic al Issue Hearing Decision JL" De c."
- Comp 1.
Byron 1 0
C C
C C
C C
C 08/82 5/
04/83*
04/83 04/83 04/83 GESSAR 11 0
N/A 2/1/83 3/2/83 04/83 N/A 05/83 05/83 None Mnne N/A 05/83 N/A H /
l Fenni 2 0
C C
C C
C C
C C
08/82 09/82 05/83
- 06/83 12/
Callaway 1 0
C C
C C
C C
C C
01/83*
02/83 05/83
- 06/83 Comanche Peak 1 0 C
C C
C C
C C
C 09/82 10/82 05/83
- 06/83 Midland 2 0
C C
C C
7/05/82 6/10/82 7/01/82 11/82 5/6/ 06/83 07/83 07/83 07/83 Watts 8ar 1 0
C 6/11/32 6/25/82 03/82 0
8/27/82 9/10/82 Mone None N/A 07/83
- 08/83 Bellefonte 0
11/22/82 2/11/83 3/10/83 4/15/83 5/20/83 5/27/83 6/24/83 Mone None N/A 08/83*
09/83 WNP-2 0
C C
C H/ 9/09/62 -
C 9/24/82 10/22/82 Mone None N/A 08/83*
09/83 11/82 10/83*
11/83 H/
Palo Verde 2 0
C C
C C
C 9/01/83 10/01/83 C
10/82 e
Perry 1 0
C C
C 7/08/82 7/05/82 7/16/82 7/29/82 11/82 04/83 05/83 10/83*
11/83 Seabrook 1 0
C 8/07/82 9/07/82 10/08/82 10/05/82 10/10/82 10/30/82 03/83 5_/
10/83 11/83 11/83 11/83 Wolf Creek 1 0
C C
C C
6/11/82 8/1'0/82 8/30/82 10/02 03/83 04/83 11/83*
12/83 Midland 1 0
C C
C C
7/05/82 10/01/83 11/01/83 11/82 6/
06/83 07/83 11/83*
12/83 l
Susquehanna 2 0
C C
C C
C
,2/01/83 3/01/83 C
C 07/82 12/83*
01/84 l
Clinton 1 0
C C
C C
C 6/11/82 6/30/82 11/82 09/83*l4/ 10/83 12/83*
01/84 1
L SU8-10TAL 0
I Indicates changes froni last report
" Commission decision on effectiveness of ASL8 decision
- " Commission decision on full-power license
TABLE 1 Licensing Schedules for All Pending OL Appilcations (Page 3 of 5)
(includes Schedules for Additional Units with Projected Construction Completion in CY 1982-1983)
(Listed in Order of Projected Commission Decision Date)
SER SSER Comm. Decision -1/
Staff Staff ASL8 Appl.
Est Plant (Months)
DES Input to DL SER Mtg FES Input to DL SSER
~7/ Start of Initial Comm.
Constr.
Delay issue Technical Issue ACRS Issue Technical Issue Hearing Decision Eff.**
Dec.***
Comp 1.
GESSAR 11 15/
0 N/A 02/84 03/84 04/84 N/A 05/84 05/84 None None N/A 05/84 N/A 16/
Watts Bar 2 0
C 6/11/82 6/25/82 08/82 C
06/84 06/84 None None N/A 07/84*
08/84 Catawba 1 0
8/05/82 1/09/83 2/06/83 3/10/83 1/05/83 4/12/83 4/30/83 09/83 03/84
- 04/84 09/84
- 10/84
- Limerick 1 0
05/83 07/83 08/83 09/83 10/33 10/83 10/83 04/84 09/84*
10/84 10/84 10/84 Comanche Peak 2 0 C
C C
C C
10/01/83 11/01/83 C
09/82 10/82 11/84*
12/84 Harris 1 0
10/82 06/83 07/83 08/83 03/83 12/83 01/84 06/84 11/84 11/84 11/84*
12/84 River Bend 1 0
7/05/82 9/04/82 10/04/82 11/05/82 12/05/82 11/08/82 11/29/82 04/83 09/83 10/83 03/85*
04/85 9/
Braldwood 1 0
01/84 11/83 12/83 01/84 D6/84 04/84 05/84 10/84 03/85 04/85 04/85*
04/85
- 50. Texas 1 0
04/83 06/83 07/83 08/83 09/83 08/83 08/83 01/84 06/84 07/84 11/86*
12/86 9/
SUB-TOTAL 0
TOTAL DELAY 3
Indicates changes from last report
- Commission dectston on ef fectiveness of ASLB decision
- Commission decision on full-power license
I (Page 4 of 5) e 1ABLE I FOOTNOTES If Licensing schedules and decision dates do not reflect additional potential delay from Emergency Preparedness Review. Commission decision dates shown are for full power, however, initial licensing may proceed (restricting power to 5% of rated full power) based on a favorable ASLB decision (if applicable) and a preliminary design verification by the applicant and staf f.
~2/
An operating license restricting operation to fuel loading and operation up to 51 power was issued. A Comission decision regarding operation above 51 power will be made on a schedule commensurate with the appitcant's need for full-power authorization, therefore, no delay is projected for this facility. As a condition to the operating Ilcense for LaSalle 1 the licensee shall complete an assessment of the reinforcing bars danaged due to drilling and coring in concrete, and the structural adequacy of the of f-gas building roof. The results are being reported to the NRC staff for review and approval, prior to power operation following initial criticality and 0-power physics testing.
3)
The estimated delay of this plant may is reduced 3 months, contingent on the content of the Partial Initial Decision scheduled for December 1982.
~4/
The delay has been reduced to zero based on the delay due to design errors found at the facility. (See Discussion Section). Design Verification Progran underway; plant modifications may be necessary. The results of this program must be considered in the Unit 2 review; plant modifications may be necessary and construction completion for this unit is likely tt change.
b
~5/
Heavily contested plants reflect 13-month hearing schedule (vs 11 months) freve SSER to Commission decision date. Commissioner Ahearne remains convinced this schedule is too optimistic.
6/ Midland Units I and 2 have the same hearing.
7/ Date shown is for first SSER following ACRS meeting. Additional SSER will be issued to close out remaining open items.
8_/ The ACRS has requested that a subcommittee reopen their review regarding Quality Assurance issues relative to construction.
f 9/ The NRC staff is reevaluating the SER dates.
~10/ The ASLB hearing which started on May 4,1982 is underway. Failure to achieve timely resolution of several of the many remaining open items could impact heavily on the schedule. The current estimate for a partial initial decision on all matters except offsite Emergency Planning is the end of December 1982. It is likely that a complete initial decision on all matters before the ASLB may not be available on Shoreham prior to March 1983.
H/ SER omitted geology-related matters which will be addressed in a June 82 supplement.
I g/ The licensee is attempting to complete construction earlier (applicant letter dated 3/29/82).
M/ ApS has indicated that construction completion dates are being re-evaluated; specific schedule for each Unit is expected in early summer.
I
-~
~. - - -
l
~
_[Page 5 of 5)
TKhtE 1 FOOTNOTES (Continued)
~14/ A prehearing conference was held on 5/4/82. Based upon appilcant's new constructlen completion date, hearings were rescheduled.
Potential P!D, May 1983 excluding of fsite Emergency Plan.
3/ Severe Accident Design; 238 Nuclear Island plus improvements.
~16/ The dates for applicant construction completion. DES issuance and FES lssuance are not given for this appilcation because it is a standardized design. Factittles that reference this design will supply this plant-specific infomation.
H/ An operating Ilcense authorizing fuel loading and low-power operation was issued on June 16, 1982.
18/ An operating license authorizing fuel loading and operation to 51 power is projected to be issued commensurate with the applicant's I
need for such authorization.
l
-19/ Based upon NRC staff briefings of the construction quality control difficulties at Zimmer, it appears that the app 1tcant's construction conpletion projection for this plant is overly optimistic. It is doubtful that work onthe Zimmer plant will be sufficiently couplete by December 1982 to permit a Commission decision on whether to issue a full-power license.
1 t
s TABLE 2 LICENSING SCHEDULES DIVISION OF LICENSIRG 5/10/82 FOR PENDING CONSIRUCIION PERMIT APPLICATIONS SER SSER (TMI Issues)
SSER (Non-TNI Issues)
ASLB Connaission Issue issue issue Staff Technical Issue Staff Technical Issue AC" I Start of 4/ Initial Decision Plant DES FES SER Input to DL SSER Input to DL SSER Meeting Hearing - Decision Date FNP 1 8 C
C C
C C
C C
C C
6/82 8/82 Allsns Creek 1 8_/
C C
C C
C C
C C
C _9]
11/82*
11/82 Skagit/Hanford 1 & 2 C y 8/82 1/
C C
C C
6/82 7/82 6/82 4/83 7/83 Pabble Springs 1 & 2 3f C
C C
N/S N/S N/S M/S N/S M/S N/S N/S Clinch River C
Cy 3/83 6/83 7/83 6/83 7/83 5/83 8/82 5/
5/84 6/84 CANCELLED Black Fox 1 & 2 6]
C C
C C
C C
C M/S N/S M/S N/S Parkins 1, 2, 3 y
C C
C N/S N/S N/S N/S M/S M/S N/S N/S If Proposed factitty is to be relocated to the Hanford reservation. Amended ER and PSAR was flied in December 1981.
2/ On March 2,1982, the utt11ty requested cancellation of their application without prejudice.
-3/ On April 9,1982. the lead applicant, Portland General Electric Compar:y, withdrew its appitcation for a site certificate from the State of Oregon, and requested cancellation of the scheduled alternate sites hearing by the NRC.
4] Dates shown are for resumption of hearings following restanption of Itcensing activities for pending CP appitcations.
5/ Date shown is f or commencement of evidentiary hearings on issuance of limited work authorization, per Board Order of February 11, 1982.
-6/ On February 16, 1982, Public Service of Oklahoma announced the cancellation of Black Fox Units 1 and 2.
The applicant submitted a fonnal motion to teminate the proceeding on April 6,1982.
y A report addressing the environmental impact of the changes that have occurred since the FES.
8] The applicant's study of the feasibility of continuing the Allens Creek project was started in February 1982 and is continuing.
~9/ The hearing ended on December 9, 1981 and was reopened April 12 14, 1982 to further consider technical qualifications of the appilcant.
- Indicates changes from last report.