ML20071F946

Forwards Analysis of Estimated Backfitting Costs Per .Estimated $174 Million Spent for Backfitting. Backfitting Expenditures Will Average 40% of Annual Expenditures from 1977 Through 1985

ML20071F946
Person / Time
Site:	Crystal River
Issue date:	03/25/1983
From:	Hancock J FLORIDA POWER CORP.
To:	Tourtellotte J NRC - REGULATORY REFORM TASK FORCE
References
NCA83-0145, NCA83-145, NUDOCS 8305230393
Download: ML20071F946 (2)

Text

..

(P0 M

.P._ owe.r March 25,1983 NCA33-0145 2

Mr. James R. Tourtellotte Chairman, Nuclear Regulatory Reform Task Force U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555

Subject:

Estimated Backfitting Costs for CR#3 Enclosed is an analysis of estimated backfitting costs applicable to our Crystal River #3 plant as discussed in your letter of February 8,1983. We have endeavored to follow the general format you presented and conclude that the data presented is consistent with that provided by other utilities.

The analysis reveals estimated total expenditures of some $174 million for backfitting since Crystal River #3 began operations in 1977.

When considered in the light of construction costs for the plant of some $410 million, backfi+.cing is indeed a significant item for Florida Power Corporation.

Further, these expenditures will have averaged about 40% of annual expenditures for Crystal River #3 (excluding fuel) over the period 1977 through 1985.

The impact on operations is a substantial increase in budgets, increased outage durations, and deferral of reliability and performance related projects that are key to performance objectiver..

We recognize the need for many of these requirements and are committed to timely implementation of all required modifications. However, the magnitude of this effort versus the balance of our operations mandates that such requirements be carefully.

considsred, and that the benefit versus ccst be favorable in order to justify a modification.

Given this carefu! consideration, we will do our part with effective management toward high quality modification projects.

We support your efforts and wish to be kept informed of your progress.

Si y,

$i s i A. Hancock ice President Nuclear Operations Enclosure 8305230393 830325 WRW:mm DR ADOCK 0500030 p

General Office 3201 Tesourm street soum. P O Box 14o42. @). Pe0~GZT.), Florda 33733 e 313-86641@1 f

i FLORIDA POWER CORPORATION CRYSTAL RIVER #3

~

BACKFITTING COSTS i

i Crystal River #3 is a 875 MWe PWR nuclear unit located at Florida Power Corporation's generating complex in Crystal River, Florida, some 100 miles north of St. Petersburg.

The total cost of the unit was $410 million, and commercial operation began in March, 1977.

Backfitting costs for Crystal River #3 are estimated at $174 million for the period 1977 y

through 1985 which covers all presently defined backfit requirements. The costs can be allocated as $87 million for NRC imposed backfitting through 1982, and $87 million in anticipated near-term backfitting costs to satisfy NRC requirements.

Costs were not accumulated on a modification by modification basis; however, an area by area analysis of backfitting costs was developed and is show below:

NRC BACKFIT ESTIMATE - 3/25/83

($ IN MILLIDNS)

AREA 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1995 TOTAL i

LICENSING 1.97 1.67 2.21 2.60 2.46 2.90 2.63 2.84 3.07 21.44 EN6INEERING 0.80 1.25 1.57 2.19 3.97 5.01 3.40 3.67 3.97 25.83 CONSTRUCTION 2.54 3.97 4.82 7.64 10.32 10.31 17.45 14.28 14.78 84.13 OTHER 1.03 1.61 1.89 2.22 2.77 2.85 3.90 4.21 4.55 25.03 TOTAL EIPENDITURES 5.44 8.50 10.49 14.66 19.52 21.06 27.38 25.00 26.36 158.43 OVERHEAD 0.54 0.85 1.05 1.47 1.95 2.!!

2.74 2.50 2.64 15.E4 TOTAL 5.99 9.35

!!.54 16.12 21.47 23.17 30.12 27.51 29.00 174.27 l

4 NOTE:

The areas addressed above include:

Licensing Analytical studies, reporting, and coordination of e

requirements with the NRC.

Engineering - Development of design drawings and specifications for e

changes and conduct of feasibility studies for alternative designs.

e Construction Procurement of materials, field supervision and installation and test labor.

Support from Chem / Rad, plant, engineering, scheduling, o

Other precurement, etc.

e Overhead Corporate icvel support including legal, accounting, personnel, etc.

3/25/83 l

i