ML20079F108
| ML20079F108 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 05000000, Seabrook |
| Issue date: | 10/29/1981 |
| From: | Larry Wheeler Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| Shared Package | |
| ML082380886 | List:
|
| References | |
| FOIA-83-498 NUDOCS 8111170178 | |
| Download: ML20079F108 (2) | |
Text
____
1 g
,{pc ueg%,
g t
UNITED STATES j
3 3.
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION n
if
(.' \\ "
WASHINGTON. D. C. 20555 o
DCT 2 91981 I
l Docket No.: 50-443 f
APPLICANT: Public Service Company of New Hampshire, et.al.
'i FACILITY:
Seabrook Station, Unit 1
)
SUBJECT:
Sunrnary of NRC Caseload Forecast Panel Meeting and Site Visit
[
to Assess Construction Completion Schedule d
On September 15, 1981, the NRC staff met with.the applicant to receive a briefing on construction plans and activities. On September 16, 1981 the staff toured the site to make first-hand observations of the status of the on-going construction programs. The staff presented its conclusions to the j
applicant on September 17, 1981. Enclosure 1 is a list of attendees at the meeting. Enclosure 2 ts the meeting notice and agenda. A handout prepared 1
by the applicant and used as an outline for the September 15 briefing is attached at Enclosure 3.
The purpose of the meeting and tour was to provide the NRC staff an opportunity to make independent observations and conclusions to support the establishment i
of priorities for the limited personnel resources now available to perfom required licensing tasks.
1 The applicant projection for Seabrook Unit 1 construction completion is
(
November 1983.
a f
Conclusions j
If the applicant's construction progress is typical of industry-wide perfomance,
[
Unit I will be completed in December,1984 This was not presented as a prediction of when this particular construction program would be completed.
The applicant was encouraged to cortinue striving to attain the November 1983 goal.
The 13-month discrepancy between the Seabrook projection and the industry record of perfomance has been noted, but will not automatically cause a change of NRC staff priorities. For the present, priorities will continue to be based on the applicant's November 1983 projection.
If it becomes apparent that an adjustment of priorities is warranted, further discussions between the applicant and senior NRC management will be held before any changes become effective.
0()
\\\\ \\\\
c t
yA Copy,Has Been Sent to PDR
l l
007 2 s 1981
.2 The NRC staff intends to schedule its next Caseload Forecast Panel visit in In response to a request by the applicant, more definitive late 1982.
guidance on infomation desired by the Panel will be provided prior to the next visit.
WY Louis L.Th
, Project Manager Licensing Branch No. 3 Division of Licensing
Enclosures:
As ttated cc: See next page.
l T
l w
e e
I l
N.
i
/f %q'c, UNITED STATES
'7 NUCLE AR REGULATORY COMMISSION
,.p, ( i.. I wassiNovos, p. c. 20sss Docket Nos.: 50-443/444 APPLICANT:
Public Service Company of New Hampshire FACILITY:
Seabrook Station
SUBJECT:
MEETING SU! NARY On March 25, 1982 representatives of the Public Service Company of New Hampshire met with the NRC staff to review the construction schedule for Seabrook Station Unit 1 and common facilities.
The meeting was held to address a 13 month difference between the utility and NRC projections for construction completion. A meeting notice and agenda are attached as Enclosures 1 and 2 respectively. Enclosure 3 is a list of persons who were present.
The meeting proceded according to the agenda.
The important points of the NRC presentation were covered in a series of comments during the PSNH presentation. There was no need for a formal Caseload Forecast Panel presentation.
The NRC management developed the following conclusions:
1.
PSNH shculd reassess their projected fuel load date and provide the results of that reassessment to the NRC. This should be completed over the next two or three months.
2.
The NRC staff will adhere to existing schedules for publication of the Draft Environmental Statement and a draft of the Safety Evaluation Report.
3.
The NRC Caseload Forecast Panel should perform another review of the construction activities.
The PSNH representatives agreed to the reassessment in the near future of the projected fuel load date, and expressed support for another Caseload Forecast Panel evaluation.
e
/./ f A I... L-
,;E6uis L'.' Wheeler, Project Manager Licensing Branch No. 3 Division of Licensing 2
Enclosures:
As stated cc: See next page.
I3 A: