ML20054F886

Safety Evaluation Supporting Order Extending Const Completion Dates to 871231 for Unit 1 & 891231 for Unit 2

ML20054F886
Person / Time
Site:	South Texas
Issue date:	04/30/1982
From:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:
Shared Package
ML20054F884	List: ML20054F883 ML20054F886
References
NUDOCS 8206180100
Download: ML20054F886 (2)

Text

~

pa atug

' / y

,.y,

',,g o,

UNITED STATES

.g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

.G c

WASHINGTON,0. C. 20555 e

Evaluation of a Request for Extension of Construction Permits Nos. CPPR-128 and CPPR-129 for the South Texas Project, Units 1 and 2 Docket Nos. 50-498 and 50-499 i

Introduction Construction Permits CPPR-128 and CPPR-129 were issued on December 22, 1975 to Houston Lightin) and Power Company, the City Public Service Board of San Antonio, Texas, CentralJower and Light Company, and the City of Austin, Texas, authorizing the construction of the South Texas Project, Units 1 and 2.

The latest date 3

for completion of the Construction of this facility, as stated in the permits,.

was May 31, 1982 for Unit 1 and October 31, 1983 for Unit 2.

On March 12, 1982, Houston Lighting and Power Company filed a request for extension of 1

the latest construction completion dates to December 31, 1987 for Unit 1 and

,1 Dbcember 31, 1989 for Unit 2.

I Discussion i

in its application for extension of the construction completion dates, Houston e

Lighting and Power Company indicated a number of factors that are responsible j

for the delay in completion of construction activities.

These are.

,4 s

(1)

Replac'ement of Brown and Root as Architect / Engineer and Construction Manager by Bechtel Power Corporation.

)

(2)

Replacement of Brown and Root as constructor by Ebasco Services, Inc.

(3)

The design of the project did not proceed as quickly as expected, the j

scope of the construction work was more extensive than originally estimated, 1

and expected unit construction rates were not achieved, in part due to changes in complexity attributable to evolving regulatory requirements, as were experienced by other nuclear power plants of the same vintage.

(4)

Certain concrete placement and welding activities were suspended by HL&P in 1979-80 as a result of investigations that disclosed problems relating a

to those activities.

i Corrective measures had been implemented and a limited resumption of these activities had begun prior to the decision to remove Brown & Root as Architect / Engineer and Construction Manager.

(5)

Progress on the South Texas Project has been essentially halted since i

December,1981, as a consequence of Brown & Root's withdrawal as constructor.

li k

8206180100 820430 5

~

{DRADOCK 05000498 f

PDR R

I

Collectively these factors have led Houston Lighting and Power to conclude that construction completion and the fuel load date will be delayed until December 1986 for Unit 1 and December 1988 for Unit 2.

Adding a contingency factor of twelve months leads to the requested extension to December 31, 1987 for CPPR-128 (Unit 1) and December.31,1989 for CPPR-129 (Unit 2).

The NRC staff has reviewed the infomation provided in Houston Lighting and Power Company's submittal and concludes that the factors discussed above constitute L

good cause for ranting the requested extension. The staff has evaluated each i

f actor contri ing to the construction delay and concurs with the Pemittee as to the reasonableness of time estimated for the delay.

As a result of the staf f's review of the Final Safety Analysis Report to date, and considering the nature of the delays, the staff has identified no areas of significant i

safety consideration in connection with the extension of the construction conaletion dates for the South Texas Project, Units 1 and 2.

The only change proposed by the Pemittee to the existing constr.uction pemit is an extension of the latest construction completion dates. This extension will not allow any work to be perfomed involving new safety infomation of a type not considered o

by, previous Commission safety reviews of the facility and that is not already allowed by the existing construction pemits.

Therefore, the staff finds that (1) this action does not involve a sianificant hazards consideration, (2) prior public notice of this action is not required, (3) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered'by the requested extension of the construction completion dates, and (4) good cause exissts for issuance of an Order extending the construction completion da te.

'J Conclusion For the reasons stated above, the staff concludes that issuance of an Order

.i extending the latest construction completion dates for the South Texas Project Units 1 and 2, 'as set forth in CPPR-128 and CPPR-129 to December 31, 1987 and December Q1,1989 respectively is reasonable and should be authorized.

l APR 3 01982 Dated:

E I

i 4

t i

g y

l The Light COIIlpSIly n..

..., w,,,,o

..m.,

r

i. o n.. m., n........, i m - -..

m n,..,.. n ST ~L-AE-806 t

r R1rold R Centen, Directcr March 12 Office Of Nuclear Pesctor Regulaticn

• ., c. /g 3

U.S. Nuclear aegulatory Ctreission 3

Washington, DC 20$55

1. gg,'-'

j s

g khj I

• SOU!H 'IEES PRCLECT, IMUS 1 AA 2 D00ETS NOS WIN 50-490; M 50-499 2

03It!14UCTICH PEIOGT NOS CPPR-128 6 3

0 9R-129 I

]

l N

Dear Mr Denton:

9 Pursuant to 10 CPit 50.55(b) and 42 tsc 2235, auston Lujhting 6 Pause Orpany DEAP), as Project phnager for the soutat Semens Pup $mst, actimy for it-1 self and for the City of Sett Antonio, Seus (acting by met thmouWt the City Public Service Board of San Antonist, Chtski Neger and L6pt. Campasy, and the City of Austin, Tomas pensitteest sep that due 3samat comespuetiast j

caspletion dates for the south Sunes M tadas 1 and 2, he entended i

frcza May 31, 1982, to

• 31, 1987, Str ladt 1 and fuem cuesher 31, 1983, i

to r=*r 31,1999, for tkilt 2.

lq As we infoceed you on Septasker 24,1M1, Sedutal Bauer 6 has

.I been selected to replace aman & Root, Zac as es -~

and Our-l senaction wr. Anam & tiot was to continus en fususteen as construence. In j

early Novuubea 1901, Beaun & Iksot advised it es wi% fram the pseject g

altogether. In Fahruary,1982, Missoo services, Inc me enknoted to be the new a

constructor.

I

'the periode required for the construction of the south Texas Project Mve been affacted by the fc13cwing factors:

1.

':he desian of the Project did not proceed as quickly as ex-I pected, the socpe of the construction work was core exte.sim than originally estimated, and esgected mit censtrxtien rates were rot achieved, in part due to etwys in ctrplexity attributable to e.tivira regalatcrf requireents, as were ex-reriered by cther nuclear pcser plants cf tN sre */intace.

2.

Cer*a r. arcate slacent:nt ar.d weldir.c activ;;ics wre sus-re.drA by PAP 1. 1979-80 as a res. ult cf nwstl?ttier.s tN:

discicwxi cr cler s ralatina te t.Tse ac :.?: les. "hese sus-ters=.s wre ent:: cd in I:rni;ata ;ct:.:n *.ettera dated Wmr.cr 3 ', 19'?. r.d Acra1 17, 196C. :r r Pec:.cn IV cf t.1

/

l 7

/.yft&

YW, W

C

~,

Nl

)

a;,3g,c; & gge7;-,

bdA m r. a +

- mr 7, y,

_2_

' enton, Di.tre: tor March 12, 1982 o

Office of Inspection and Enforement (I&E). Corrective measurce had Nen icpimented ard a ifraited resw.ption of these activities had tegun prior to the decision to reeve Br%n & Poot as Arctutect/ Engineer and Constru: tim Manager.

3.

Pw;ress on the South Texas Project has been essentially halted since Decenter,1981, as a consequence of Brown &

Foot's withdrawal as cmstructor.

Our current schedulo provides for resuming non-safety related ccost.W1 by June 30, 1982, and safety-related constration by Septanter 30, 1982. We pro-wt a rmaining construction duration to " ready for fuel loading" of fifty-cne uths for thit 1 and seventy-five months for thit 2 from the *2mm onestructico rmres at the site based on the current status of ocnetzutica, applicable recent Andustry experience, and a partaal "rollinqr fow tens" propesa.

Attactrent 1 suonarizes cur tentative projected ountruction schedule.

Exchtcl is preparing a acre definitii.e schedule 14tich is espected to be available in July,1982, and which may result in cxmpletion dates eerlier than those projected in this 1ctter.

Nuclear power plant construction experience indicates that a contingency period should also be included in these Wedules. Penuittees would provid? fif-teen mcoths as a contingency on each mit.

.Wingly, Pesestbens requoet thr.t CPPR-128 be extended to N 31,1987,.anu CPPD-129 mutandse to December 31,1989.

The forecping emotitutes good cause for the estension of the latset cap-pletion dates for CPPR-128 and CPPR-129 as requested herein.

The requested extatsione to the latest ogistion dates involve no sig-ntf tc.mt hazards coraiderations.

Since the amendnants have no safety or envircramental signifiennoe, they f all within Class II tzider 10 CFR 170.22 for thit 1 and Class I for thit 2. 'Ihe aguropriate fee is therefore $1,400 and our check in that amoup*. is enc 1ceed.

Your prtrpt and favorable action on this request will be appreciated.

Very truly yours,

'deo W Opr,I%

W 1

Jtive

.co-der.t KX.SIUi LIQf~';C & PctG C'VPNTi, Pr^ye %r.aTr cf the Scuth ibxas Pro:ect, actit.c N roin en r >

hCf cf itself arxi tN ctNr la 11erts, ':'I Cr CF 3Ri N Di:C, T D id, nct':.c c.' ra L~;ut ?>

~ ~~.' P G L *: sip',LT. TC; X cf t:t ::.t ci 3r Jr.ter.12, :077A*, TrhD L:G:c TJ"P7C., v.d a,

O!'*.

C T M W ~', T E.

} E,:

y--..

w.--

s 1

i 9-h' ta i

t i:

. O

} g

,,..s

~

..__.j.

-g 2 ;1 3

i I.

p-n

.~

- - ~ _ -

.f-

.c L.!

,#4...

3 1

a.-

I1 g?L _.

1p 4 i i-L. 5

• i 1

, ~.. s. _ _ _..

n f j

a gg

., L!

~ - -

e r._

a i

I i

1 3 e, ll l

.L P

1:

I l

3e i -

g d

g 3

l

...1.

[

-t8j 1

o e w ~ m,,,,

l p*

8 3 k 2

... y 1-i:

!l T._t.T T

i. e..

I

.A p4y p_

s.

- - +..

h d

%y l

_______y 4

~

2 t

2.

1 2

.t

.i e.

.5 g

n g

g i.

~ 1 1. '

i.:

2 :

4

+

(

O e

m.

se _ wag,

-,i-w

_w m um@W e

i ST-HL-AE-806 STATE OF TEXAS ColmTY OF HARRIS GEORGE W. OPREA, JR., being first duly sworn, deposes and says:

That he is Esecutive Vice-President of HOUSTON LIGHTING 1. POWER COMPANY, Project Manager of the south Texas Project end an Applicant hereing that the fore-going request for estensions of lat4st oesplation dates, including Attachment 1 thereto, has been proposed under his supervision and directions that he hamus the contents thereof:

and that to the best of his knowledge and holief said request and the facts contained therein are true-and correct.

DATED:

This 12 day of htd=*I

, 1982.

Signed Subscribed and sworn to before me tads /4 day of AO

, 1982.

__A ^ '= ' 4 Lb /

sotary Puht.c g

My comission expires:

), M )0 lllE L

c------

~ c h uonL ghnnga nl.c ( omp.ns 7-ic.- AE-806 cc:

G. W. Corea, Jr.

J. H. G31dberg J. G. Dewease i

J. D. Persons O. G. 8arker i

C. G. Robertson R. A. Frazar a

J. W. Williams i

J. W. Briskin J. E. tai r R. L. W!

(

S. E Seu J. T. Collins (NAC i

D. E. Sollt A([W i W W. M. N111. Jr.

i

": kr.'*To.

!12 I

J. R. nemmen I Aamenetete, aseman. Rets. & Ame1 red) 57F as Diveeterserdiesthe" en..". L'B"'"

lessgottge a Refereement j

i R. L.

u. slused I

contret a Light Compaqr 4 LSegestag Beerd 1

P. 8. Ses

.. S.

tuutsetse l

Corpus Christi. Temos 70003 E

}

L L. Meneesk/S. 9therny C.

III city of Ausste 9

P. E Sen 1988

.-est essettne 27584 F

Ausets. Tense 75157 J. B. Aseten/A. venteem erg fer.

3. sfl Cit public en tease P.

. Sen 1 gel W 18senta San Antente. Iones 7W98 P. 8.

Lees Livesase. Ce ifornia 94650 Brian E. Berwid, teemire Willies S. Jordan !!!

Assistant Attorney General Normen & usiss for the Stata of Tones 1785 I Street. N. W.

P. O. Box 12548 Seite SOE Casitol Station Washington D. C.

20004 Austin, Texas 78711 Laney Sinkir.

Citizens for Ecuitatle utilities. Inc.

Cttizens Concerned About declear Power c/o Ms. Peggy Bucacrn 5106 Cass 0re soute 1. Bcx 168:

San Antonic. Texas 72233 Iraze-ia. Texas 7742 Jay Gutierrez. Escuire Hearing Att rney Cffice of the Esecutive Legal Director U. 5. Nuclear Aegulatory Casmiss1on nnon,_.0 1_2M51_...

no w- %.. - ee,