ML20067C506

Interrogatories Re Nonfuel Operation & Maint Cost Considerations.Related Correspondence

ML20067C506
Person / Time
Site:	Midland
Issue date:	12/02/1982
From:	Stamiris B STAMIRIS, B.
To:	NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE LEGAL DIRECTOR (OELD)
References
ISSUANCES-OL, NUDOCS 8212100095
Download: ML20067C506 (2)

Text

- .

p. RED COHHESPONN#'

U..S..NucIsar Regulatory CorrSiddisit In the Matter of Docket Nos.

CPC Mid'Iand Plant Units I & Z '82 DEC -9 m 99329 OL 0-330 OL BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND :LICENSING .. m B..OARDUldh 1Z/2/82 STAMIRIS RErUESTS OF NRC STAFF REGARDING NONFUEL OPERA ~flON' AND MAINTENANCE COST CONSIDERATIONS The following recuests are based upon NU?I.G/CR2844, ORNL/

TM 8324 "Nonfuel O E M Costs for Large Steam Electric Power Plants

-1982" and the O & M cost considerstions of the FES cest/ benefit analysis for Midland. In recognition of the provisions of.JO CFR 2720(h)(Z)(li), Intervenor Stamiris recuests the NRC Staff to volun-tarly respond to these interrogatories.

I. Explain in detail the basis for the drop in O&M cost estimates from.10 ml?/kwh to 6 mil /kwh between the DES and FES table 6.1 assessment, Including the basis for the change in capacity facters _

of DES table 2.I(p2-3) and FES table 2.1 (pA-32).

Z.Did the "kwh" denominator in the mil / Rwh column of FES table 2.1

, change fem its DES value? If yes, explain the change, the reason ,

l for change, and the effects of such change en O&M cost estimates.

3 Why did the NRC change frem,the DES " design rating" of 1310 hWe-i to the FES " gross nameplate rating" of 1357MWe, and what effect does 1

this kave en the O&M cast estimatest (tables 6.1 and Z.1)

4. What would the average annual O&M costs be if based en the 66%

l average lifetime capacity factor? (Answer in millient of dollars and l

m.11/kwh.)

l 8212100095 821202 PDR ADOCK 05000329 G PDR

5. Are the O&M cost considerations ecual for the Unit I and Unit. II i

reactors? Explain

6. Provide a breakdown of Midland's average annual O&M cost estimates into its component parts as set forth in NUREG/CR2844 table 1.1, p2.

Cite the capacity facter and EVTe value used'. Include estimates for ensite staff, maintenance materials, suppIIes and expenses, regulatory expenses, effsite support services,. Insurance, administrative and general, and add any , ether f actors considered for Midland.

7. To what extent have operational surveIIIance and monitoring er ISI programs been taken into account in O&M censiderations? Include but de not IIait th is answe r t o programs discussed en SER pages 5-19,and 5-21, 3-13, 5-I I, and 5-14.

8. What cost es't imate Las been made and/or included in O&M costst't-imates for remediation of the Unit I beltIir.: we ld WF-70 er other ,

I reacter vessel welds to protect against embrittlement and pressurized thermal shock? *

\

9.,To what extent have the expenses of the galvanic protection system for piping been taken into account in the FES O&M estimates?

Respectfu1Iy submitted, cc: ASLB Judges M.MIIIer, CPC Barbara Stamfris W.Paton,NRC 5795 N River Secretary NRC Freeland,. Mich. 48623

_ _ .