ML20079R105
| ML20079R105 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Midland, 05000000 |
| Issue date: | 09/14/1979 |
| From: | CONSUMERS ENERGY CO. (FORMERLY CONSUMERS POWER CO.) |
| To: | CONSUMERS ENERGY CO. (FORMERLY CONSUMERS POWER CO.) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20079E080 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-83-579 NUDOCS 8402020068 | |
| Download: ML20079R105 (57) | |
Text
-
6.
ACHIDA FOR CASE LOAD FORECAST PANEL SITE VISIT September 18 Through September 20, 1979 September 18 1.
Briefing for site tour (GSK). f$/.
2.
Construction scheduling tools (WGJ).
3 Consumers Power scheduling tools for testing (DDJ).
h.
Site tour (DSM).
September 19 1.
Staff presentation of Forecast Panel's current model and application or results,for Midland.
2.
General discussion on bases for l'ay schedule revision of 6/81 and 11/81 fuel load dates and bases for following presentations (GSK).
3.
Presentation of installation curves for separate unit startups and rela-tion to new startup philosophy, productivity rates, etc (WGJ).
h.
New Testing logic (DBM).
5 Status of Preop Program (DBM).
6.
Status of problems and corrective action on site fill (TCC).
7.
F/C #6 developments (GSK).
8.
Discussion on CP Co recent actions on SER open itens and TMI-2 issues (GSK).
9 Staff caucus.
10.
Staff Exit.
GSKeeley/cg 9/14 /79 i
i i
ZACKB3-579 PDR n
Y fV
L Y./..Sf?
f
- u, f 2
6/y
. 1
. t DISCUSSION OUTLINE FOR tmC SITE VISIT September 18-20, 1979 (GSK Items) 1.
Briefinc for Site Tour 1.
Current Project Status @ 9/1/79 A.
Composite Project % Complete - 62% (Based on trends over 50%
probability and latest physical quantities estimate)
B.
Staffing Levels:
(1) Engr and H0 - 575 (Engr @ 366)
(2) Site Personnel:
Manual
- 2,238 (no problem with availability)
Nonmanual 705 Subcontractors -
652 CP Co 359 (ir.cludesev 200 Operating personnel)
Total
- 3,954 C.
Expenditures @ $1,150 million as of 9/1/79 Procurement 95%
completed based on dollars.
D.
Dow Chcmical MAPCC ok'd to 12/82.
EPA is still evaluating.
2.
Principal Work Activities (Cable, Small Pipe most ecepleted in turbine
. building, civil (hangers and restraints)
A.
Peactor Buildirs #1 - Closing construction opening, NSSS erection and main steam line installation.
B.
Reactor Building #2 - Post-tensioning tendon installation, NSSS erection (RCP's) and mainstfeam line installation.
C.
Turbine Building - T/G erection for both units and HVAC installation.
Rotor and stator shipment (ship from storage and on-site 9/23/79).
D.
Auxiliary Building - Main steam lines installed at 70L ', restraints, decon, coating for walls and floor, EVAC, fuel pool (hydro at lower level in preparation for installing racks).
E.
Yard and Miscellaneous Structures - Finalizing Administrative Building work for T/0 to CP Co, reroval of surcharge for D/G Building, erecting storage tanks and service water coolinr tower. Piping and equipr.ent inculation work in Evaporator Building, ducttanks for security.
r
o.,
- g 2'
F.
Bulk Materials Installation (Total Plant) -
(1) Large Pipe
- 88% complete)
\\ (2) Small Pipe h6% complete) 4 03
)./
(3) Cable Tray
- 95% complete) Based on Preliminary F/C #5b A
(k) Conduit
- 66% complete)
Total Quantities
/h (5) Wire & Cable - 38% complete)
(6) Connections - 26% complete)
G.
Systems have started to be turned over to CP Co and vill be dis-cussed in more detail in Item 5 3.
Our understanding of their visit is for them to look at completion of construction so the NRC can set priorities on use of NRC Technical Staff to review FSAR. We want to be reviewed on an equivalent basis to other plants. We show % completion to include licensing items that are > 50% chance of being implemented.
e V
g.
f d.
2.
General Discussion & Basis For May 1979 Schedule Revision 1.
Developments since last NRC visit in March 1978 A.. F/C #5 development (Issued in June 1978) and laborers strike 5/1/78 to 6/15/78.
B.
F/C #5a developed in July 1978 (Target F/L Study) to factor in effects of strike. Results:
No change -in Fuel Load Dates '(utilized
,.,3 months contingency).
j C.
F/C #5b -development in March 1979 (Target F/L Study). Why: Obtain
/
better definition of 1978 work stoppage effects, evaluate latest known Project requirements (licensing, experience on electric'al and small pipe installation, diesel generator studies) and schedule i
uncertainties, reevaluate achievability of Target F/L Dates.
Results:
Contractor recommendation of interim change in Unit 2 F/L from November 1980 to February 1981 with no change in Unit 1 F/L. Final adjustment may be necessary in Fuel Load Target Dates pending resolution of licensing issues and soils problem ( August removal of preload).
D.
Revised CP Co Testing Concept (May 1979)
Results: Changed Unit 2 F/L Target to June 1981. No change in Unit 1 (excludes TMI-2 effects) and major open licensing issues and use this concept for F/C #6 preparation.
Basis - Revised logic of completing all construction, preoperational testing and FTf for both units. DBM will cover in more detail.
E.
F/C #6 Developments (1) Preliminary finding in July indicated an increase in electrical quantities of 10 to 20% due to revised lengths of eiverage circuits, more circuits due to later information from vendors and refinement of design is being looked at more closely for F/C #6 as to location of circuits and not using an average pulling rate. Most of increase in circuits is in yard for security. This resulted in future unachievable installation rates and Target Fuel Load Dates which prpbably could not be met.
(2) CP Co Policy discussion to factor in F/C #6, the TMI-2 issues and Open Lic ensing Issues.
(3) Becauce of Items 1 and 2 above, the revised Project Schedule and F/C #6 finalization will be delayed until January 1980.
m
,l} )__ q/f s
.)
lcl'" l f~l*'
~
l e
e t
4
~ */ 'O A 7/.
7.sds, 0,
. S rp 7E Y-??
%.,,..)
.:;,,. ; ~
.i- -g
- i s
-s e g,
',r r... /.. v
.l s
g b-j j!
l h
[
~
~ --
. y,, _ k *n
.n
- D
~ ?)
- g.. ; r o
(
s' f, A fd' h
l
~
~a JA ', m, Ji a
}
I
'*?
'?*
I'- E!
Os J l t 11,
_/
h 4
l I
e SP-g I $
.Y
_j 5 --
L*O.
l? - 123 ll.,:,"O3 l ' *, 0 ' O
, e'l.5, (J d s.
. 0D N
%e
- S
[ 'D D w
o q" l**
_s e
t
- p
.D
' O, ?$D
/ c, &O
$M i b" o l)O, hl m
I Ie
- b * *^
- t s
1 e
e
'g ),
,e
.e
- f ). h,
.3 0 )
l." = Q',
.2 S A.o. JY
/
- e I
i L%. r, N?,p))
!?O D 0,
D Y, l $
~c bi-:
- n
- f. s,
,am..
i, I
i i.
i t
'\\
\\
\\
1 1,
)
\\
t 1
\\
\\
\\
\\
i d
i e.
}
n e
&~.J f
/
3y
<. w p ;.., n ;
~l lJ 7, l -
e
/
-l h %, y.' )
h E L*
3..
/.
,,\\.,
r~ ^ R-
/..'
- e J. I 'o '
L's n
,{
'(,
.( o e r -r
- s L-j' n i p s w l.. c.. m r.
6:, g s
- hw%.ga
~
)
w,
,,.. l-
/..
~
/
~
a hD oA f'
s/ -
A p'
=
s
.w e
b NM-I ic,: 3 ux; s..,.
l-r -
p<--
w
/
3
'y
? I i
e-
$DL - wysA-j fp a Y
,$ ' ')
~
r
?'
y y-e w.
wh f I
I p
l s
.ew gL L $s *
,re h'
Consum:rs Powar Company Report #26, June 29, 1979 Pursuant to conditions 2 F.B. and 2 F.C. of Constructi.an Permits CPPR-81 and CPPR-82, the following report covers the period July 1 - September 30, 1979.
A.
Construction work to be performed during the period:
/Cor plete Unit 1 electrical penetration in the Auxiliary Building
- b. INc the blockwork and shielding in the Auxiliary Building u vr*4 c, /> ".
. cx i-u.c.
4 Cv..victe HVAC equipment in the Auxiliary Building s #5-7. W 6.
/ Complete installation of primary LP RC piping in the Reactor Building No 2 Ccapicte-fhid heads in the Reactor Building No 2
,kg C"flA
-.Cce+fewe Jufo
/ Complete noving in Unit 1 internal heads and CRDM d
heads in the Reactor Building No 1 N MpYd e
Co...p lc t: HVAC ductwork and equipment in the Turbine Building No 2 q*
- c"?(
ceni ~ e.
[4N-setting Unit 1 lower shell and hoods E be d e c-
- p. ~,
vvc.plcte crection of condensate and miscellaneous tanks G
electrical in tunnel the evaporator roof and siding - h. '"A
- *~""
~
%, Continue installation of ductwork in the Auxiliary Building Continue installation of restraints and equ.'yment barriers in the Auxiliary Building ts Continue installation of tendons and post-tensioning in Reactor Building No 2 ys. Continue installation of internals and assemble CRDM in Reactor Building No 2 Yn Continue installation of Unit 1 primary loop reactor coolant piping in Reactor Building No 1 la Continue installation of restraints and barriers in Reactor Building No 1 b Continue installation of miscellaneous equipment in Turbine Building No's 1 & 2
'!c _ Continue installation of large and small piping in the Turbine Building No's 1 & 2
%._ Continue installation of uire and cable in the Turbine Building No's 1 & 2 Y& Continue installation of chemical and oily waste B.
Supervisors and engineers of the applicant and architect-engineer who are expected to be onsite during the period July 1 - September 30, 1979:
1.
Consumers Power Company RMKoltuniak
- Engineering Assistant, QA Engineering x
'N
~ ~ ~ '
~ ' ' ~~--
."~~~*T-
? ~ ' '~ T*-' '~ : ' --
-- Q
.a%
er'
.a_,
.[ %
CPCo REVISION '7 SCitEDULE PilILOSOPllY U
V p7 I.
Our present schedule (Rev. 6) interfaces Unit I and Unit 2 preoperational testing through Event 200.
Event 200 are those Unit I rystems that were selected for startup and/or opera.tionally required to support licensing and fuel load requirements for Unit 2.
Additional information and interface points between Unit 2 operation and Unit 1 preoperational testing may cause us to change from our present Event 200 philosophy.
The most notable new information is the apparent and unavoidable prospect for delaying the start of the t' nit 2 and common test schedule, movement of the Unit 2 Fuel Load date closer to the Unit
^
I date, and additional snanpower strain especially upon the Operations Staff (a fairly inflexible resource). The proposed Bechtel Schedule (see attachment 1) will force the Midland Project into a startup mode wherein major integrated plant testing on both Units 1 and 2 could occur simultaneously, e.g., Unit 1 HFT and ILRT during Unit 2 Fuel Load, Zero Power Testing and/or Power Escalation Testing. This coupled with increased manpower strain and Unit 2 technical specification restraints imposed on the Unit 1 Preoperational Test Program will cause certain delays with the Unit 1 schedule and also reduce availability of Unit 2 power production.
To alleviate the potential for an excessively long Unit 1 Preoperational Test Program and maximize the potential for sustained Unit 2 power production, Scheduling recommends that the Unit 1 and Unit 2 Preoperational Test Programs be merged as shown on Attachment 2 and Revision 7 curve on.
11.
Major points to note with the merged Preoperational Test Program (Rev. 7) are listed on Attachment 3.
The following notes also apply to Rev. 7:
1.
Unit 1 Fuci Load occurs as previously planned, i.e., November 1981.
2.
Unit 2 Fuel Load occurs in July 1981 as compared to the previous date of November, 1980.
III.
Several advantages are inherent with the proposed merged Preoperational Test Programs:
1.
The majority ( 95%) of Unit 1 preoperational testing will be performed prior to Unit 2 Fuel Load.
This will relieve Unit 1 preoperational testing of restraints and de' lays due to Unit 2 license operating restrictions (technical specifications and surveillance testing).
This will increase Unit 2 availability for 3' power production owing to fewer interferences from Unit 1 preoperational 4 i, -
testing.
?
v-
!:, h r, ' b I,
~
[,.. r h, 'i '
D o
s' ' *' 5 *.
T 9
I f
.A' y a gp(I'
/
e b '[
g
, i ;" '"
,e
}'
i t'
,r (
s'
) q'
,3 p'
g'
?'
,p-
_ l t, 'r.
, 3 k-I.
s 1'
I;~
- L t
~. :.
e.
g, g.-
t
~
IPAGE 2 i
2.
_ Inherent timeframes are built into the merged. schedule to absorb corrective design and/or maintenance following major periods of integrated initial plant operation and preoperational testing.
Historically, nuclear plant immediately following the Cold Hydro Test Phase and the ll t Ftest pr Test Phase due to equipment or other operational failures.
o unctional failures have in the past slowed and in many cases stopped critical pa These progression onto the next succeeding scheduled event (s) until repairs and/or design problems were resolved.
These timeframes are shown on Attachment I as " Resolve Punchlist Items-- ".
3.
No two (2) Unit I and Unit
_ simultaneously.
2 milestone events are ' required to be performed is impractical and in many cases impossible to focus site activiti It on more than one (1) major Unit 1 and Unit es 2 milestone activity at the same time.
The Midland Site is currently being staffed to permit simultaneous component testing with each Unit but not for simultaneous integrated milestone cesting.
the Testing Group, Operations Group, Bechtel, B&W, and support.
4.
Separation of Fuel Loads l'and Unit 2 Fuel Loads are separated in time to support
-Unit the Dow -
contract with regard to process steam availability.
5.
LLRT/ILRT/ SIT are performed nearly piggy-back during the same timeframes Containment capitalizing on the commonality of'equipnent, leak rate and stru personnel, and vendor support required to perform these tests as opposed to the inefficiencies due to duplication of effort if the two programs were handled separately and spaced one year apart as presently planned.
6.
The integrated ESFAS Test would be a common test phase.
The safeguards system for the Midland Project is essentially a common system in that each plant is designed te respond to the.others safeguards actions.
As such, this particular milestone test for each plant will include the other plant to the extent substained power during conduct of the test.that neither could provide Thus, ESFAS testing should be performed for each plant during the same timeframe to avoid duplication of effort and interruption of power production from the "on-line" plant
PAGE'3 V..'
7.
Some potential delay items to the Unit 2 schedule could gain additional time for resolution.
1 The reactor coolant pump snubbers and the diesel generators are restraints to the Unit 2 Hot Functional Testing Program.
As such, both of thase items could receive up to 14 weeks additonal time for resolution.
l 8.
Smoother and lower resource leveling will be realized.
Resource loading for the merged Preoperational Test Program will be both smoother and lower (especially operators) as compared to the resource leveling that results from imposing the proposed construction delays on the present Preoperational Test Program schedule (see major point discussion item 3 above).
9.
The potential problem of spent Fuel Pool area work interfering with fuel receipt would be less significant.
Receipt and storage of new fuel on site imposes a number of restrictions on the fuel storage facilities (spent fuel pool area).
Typically, this means all activities are limited to either fuel handling itself or to routine maintenance of fuel handling related equipment.
Usually, the license for receipt and storage of "special nuclear mat'erials" (fuel) specifically prohibits construction activity or any other dirt generating or heavy maintenance work which could potentially af fect cleanliness or structural integrity of the new fuel.
i i-The equipment access openings for both containments open directly into the Spent Fuel Storage Area.
The potential problem of receiving and storing Unit 2 fuel conflicting with construction of Unit 1 (construction access to the inside of the containment) and tendon tensioning on the Unit 1 Containmuet Building could be significantly reduced with the merged Preoperational Test Program.
IV.
There are'some disadvantages with the proposed merged Preoperational Test Program:
1.
Construction may not be able to meet turnover dates for some Unit 1 items.
Rev. 7 curve.
2.
The feedwater and condensate systems will have to be layed up for approximately 14 weeks between chemical cleaning and the start of IIFT.
3.
The intensity of the testing period will permit little, if any, resource availability for preparation of procedures af ter 1979.
PACE 4-4.
The Operator License examination should be administered within 3 months of'the expected date for Fuel Load.
With the compression of the'two Hot Functionals the scheduling of these examinations may be dif ficult.
The examinations must inficxible for the NRC examiners.be docketed well in advance and dates are us 5.
Due to anticipated examination failures and attriition of operators, a Hot Reactor-Operators Training Program was planned between Unit 2 and' Unit I startup. -' This program is normally a 9 month program.
This schedule will not permit this second license class to be complete in time for startup of Unit 1.
~ ;.,,
6.
Items 1 and 2 above will lead to a problem with availability of trained Auxiliary Operators available' for testing, and may require overstaf fing
-early in the test phase to assure availability of trained perconnel for Hot Functional and startup testing.
3 O
1 I
~
g h
4 8P P-h{
~
M o t,, sio i
0ARTuf
$590EdCE 9
4
'3 WH Y C P C0 P 11 I L O'S O P 11 Y C 11 AN G E ?
1.
TRY TO IIAINTAIN PROJECT COMPLETION BY NOVE!!!iEP 1981.
2.
IIOW TO HOST EFFICIENTLY ACCOMPLISit CIVEN Al!OUNT OF WORK:
A.
TESTING B.
COliSTRUCTION 3.
HOW TO COPE WITil CONCURRENT MILESTONE TSSTING 4.
-DOW CONTRACT RESTRICTI,0NS i
'70% FOR 6 MONTilS A.
UNIT 2
~
A
.-B.
UNIT 1 100 110URS Q
y w
Sfw 6
e 4
e l
t O
m
__~
-Q*
COMPARISON OF PHILOSOPHIES PRESENT:
FUEL LOAD C/O UNIT 2 ENERGIZE UNIT 1 ENERGIZE
/
PREOPS HFT PES FUEL LOAD C/O NEW:
FUEL LOAD C/0 UNIT 2 ENERGIZE UNIT 1 ENERGIZE HFT f
PES f
PREOPS FUEL LOAD C/0 I
I i-1 I
i 19.79 1980 1981 1982 a
B F-
Miv! ?.n 1 [ : o;rii C T Piu. o. i..::n r:c'.'ni. T! :. 'i 9!wnrncr
... - =
UNIT ' l U U i T ".L
-.7 lNiv rno Tt.cr.3:..it'u!.t.
f.h rt sit Tir.*a t<ll'2 Ec: ran"..?
l H T; C S ci:CD s H.C.
Y u n L ~.r r. or i;. I t
E'. jiH T l
TEST !?ntivii t!:.';
i g
y g
g. L '! Tt ' b g
i I
i I- -
,1 l ~ p.z,3. s.o I
.I n /, c...
I
'5 Itl1l'IilI.
!!M / MI' m
l l
FL:?SH FLLISH
-.-..;; )
. g
- 5. s.. r o g yy g
g l'itilG E p333 I
s.u rc -.I.
-Q lillllfil i
I H: OS / RCS
~
g g
y,,, y3,,
RCS CDLD r LUSil g
l
.gp f M O TEST EUA#E l
s-s r-ro -l~_RCS / OTC G N35Z l
3 fl YOi(O g
g
+
1st :
I q.a.o.ro l
./f'.,;)-..
ry...;o. yo l
RCS CCLC I
l 1:YDRO TEST l
go-,.r. rn I
i.? S / D r3 fi l
l G,r
'. r; r. yo i
flOT
~.
tritol;G
.. r;;g)..
i F
TH R L l
I TECT l
s;.- 11. va - -
1 I
!!Di' CONT 21/lt/EttT Q'.%
l l
II. ll T FvHC Tl0ll til g
g TES Tit lC.
g g
I s,. e-ri I
m
).-. s. - s i.~.n i
- .g,y I II R I! S! T l
p_.p.s-vg i
0 CONT!Ill:M Er. T
(~.
I s.s-et l-- -
I !.R T
- -- ~} - - yr o%, - - - - - - -
}'
3-ts.so-.I li. i:T / SIT I!DT I
I Fil CTIONf:!-
lid T l
I D
. COMPLE TE TEST I U!!CTIOt:liL l
,r.js. y; I
BHCELlHE TC511NG l
l PO3T t/FY OlHC PEC TIO.nl l
~ l_ Hiiulillll:1 77; -
.{s"?lo
~~~76~~~~
~~~
H rPLir.nt.T COM PL(lTI'.
f '. #~f' L._~
1
~*
l E 3 Flia l
SUDialYS TEST C!l5ELINE
[i3 Fits RESl!LTS RNi>
lifY l
l p)
EVilL UH Y10 H
[. LUST INSPECTIOil
.to S E I.l!w.
g l.
yiyo--.
\\
g.
t.. rr. y:
J l
t-- l. U*~'~
- l. Oli (~*
l c -:.1-78 y.ppgjg.j;_.;7 Stit,? 'II:: rCs r
{ '\\
- ~
IU:2.t!L TS 111:1)
' " ' " ' \\..' ^'""""",,u.r r riu u :;:te n :i,r.:
-~
. ( -.... -.....L,.. n. <,
I r:n.u w.-
run c
. L 'lE L. w l m...i,... v,
I n m.ss,
\\..'
i c.sr. u:. r w c: c c.
ra,, n.u:..,....:. w.2-
/.. ;!. i* -?os : 5 E.'. lt of /;. ? 1
6
^
- ~ - ~-
AD V A N T A-C E S
'l.
ALL CONSTHUCTION A!'D TESTING COMPLETED PRIOR TO FUEL LOAD
'Y 2.
NO HODE TESTINC
.i t
~3.
PUNCliLIST. CORRECTION TIME 4.
NO SIMULTANEOUS MILESTONE TESTING 1
5.
HORE TIME TO RESOLVE PRESENT PROBLEMS 6.
NO SECURITY / IIP RESTRAINTS ON CONSTRUCTIOli
- ~
~
-7, LEVELS RESOURCES I
8.
FLEXIBILITY IN SCl!EDULE 6
4 i
i
-O e
I.
.D I 5AD VA N T A-C E S 1.
TESTING RESOUltCES i
2.
UNIT 1 TURNOVER DATES HOVED FORWARD 3.
OPERATOR RESOURCES:
s.
e A.
NO BREAKS DUE TO LEVELING B.
EARLIER REQUIREMENTS C.
OPERATOR LICENSING l
A 3
W g.
a.
i i
e e
e 1
4 l
4 i
i i
l
.e-y y-c
-,-s-a
,o w,
, - -, y e
yE l$IDLAdD NsT
?RoG/?Am f
i i
l l
^
I l-
EST TA FF O CA TE1)
OA IM h5hsoPLE ASCI GNED
/ A]
79 {fh
~
/ll)ct! EASE 7'e 7 r l n
'Jo
~
hs7 NAAluAL
~
klf/TTEA) Y A/'AfaUED i
kgil
/
/SCu6D TN/3 VEAR 73 72/A)E WA NEAd}// N L/bt MEIN EAI T /b/
CoAisr Tyi n Evs
~
o
- //yanosrAnc TECrs(APAeow v aiirduiaeb
- Du crwoRx 7?s7 f/eo esAM k2oS A'Am (kgetput6 / Ell /Gid t
~ FLIA S/J/ 9 G JTf ( Tu)s) fopmra v rx ce riA)+
i
. c
,,-,,w.--
,e.,
-.----,.---.,----..n---.-.-,,.-..._-----____m
MIDLA1:D PI:OJECT TEST PROCEliDl'n 1NiiD; !;TATt1S f.l)g f.
th u-6 Jiuequ m7 v.
\\
Hull!!ER sci!EDULED INTEL!:AL REVIEW TOTAL TO liC Dl:AFTED
!!!i!!!iER DRAFTED CO'1PI.ETI:D APPROVED PREOPS yEcli (P)
//V 32
(.29%)
32
(,28$)
/9 (J6.62)_
O MEcli (S) g6 5/
(,29,2%)
f(2 (39,7,g) jq (i9:pg}
/ (~fj uc
'/7
/9 (Vo.72)
/9 (38.b2) y
(.t 1. 92)
</ (u nEc 23 9
(3Y77) to
(</s.72) to O/3.72)
- 2. Co.c SPECIFICS MEcIl (P)
/
/
/
/
6 MEcu (S)
/c
'l ('/of) 2 (zo2)_
2 ( zo g)
/ (to 2 1sC to 1 ( 76 2 )
8
( 26 2)
& (ut) 3 (302 ELEC O
O O
O O
CENERICS uEcu
?
5 (ss52) 4' NH2) 3 (53.3%)
3 (ss.s 1sC f
5*
C 5~~
5~
ELEC 2/
16 (9 S 72)
/8 (9572) is (EC 72) 17(es.h f,,a
[ciwbvwb -
/ O 'l [
Z
// 5 (36. 5 $5 f,,,z 3 m ryrb Q
Zirrent vifsJ - (,8 ( 2/ B 7)
Qt
/$rpxovrb
//
( L 5 2)
o.jl
/CO 'X te-e C7
}
fu j.
.}
73 n
to j
gg) i a
i i
ys
.t y
759 i
J' i
,M 2C?
E l
i
/
I So
.'.a.......
.7
'I 20 t,o
..._.s./.......
4
+
.50 2 s
i_
fa
._.....J so s
t Jg e
g
/0 109 h $bA e
9,,
e,
.I I 3 3....d..h i
70
. xp[x
_........ _.'+......._.
_2 i
,70 p
)* p
- /C '
X Noms c cr Trocrdocr5 Sc.o r tn r3 v e le,se t r b 12 7,
O bcTVAL N u m E,F C c f 7;:ccr d sRr s FM*T r b 10 26]
12 ff Na lg 9
/6 JJ 50l Gr I) 5'~5 @
oY 31
/9 af f 8
'S W lil
(='
!.i 2.T
??
11 t
It*L'i
.Tvi Y t10 C J'3 7 3rprra au rg ccYoefx Mc yrs ;grg N ccs-14rg s
s hr: ho!f t'r' hi* (*t*7, bdt y hretrc,E Srcsfa'a s isar'e a.
$ r 5 ::;*b.ir'rs r
[
[f M
0
[
g e
REVISION NO 19 DATE 8-22-79
~
PAGE 14
!!IDLAND PROJEC1 TEST PROCEDURE INDEX-DRAFT DUE DATE & PROC NO S PROCEDURE RESP DRAFT REVIEW STATUS IMPl.EMENT NUMBER & REV DISC DUE DUE SCOPE DRAFT DATE TITLE g,
2TP-NIS.02.0 1 08-30-79 0
03-05-81 Incore Monitoring
- y,. 7 94 Sys Tests OTP-C;[E.03.0 P 08-31-79 2-B 0
Aux Bldg Crane Pre-Op i-A ITP-RCS.02.0 P 08-31-79 9
03-27-81 Reactor Coolant Pump Initial Run, Ilow & NPSH Test 2TP-llSS.04.0 S 08-31-79 0
MS & TS Drains 2SP-CDS.01.0 S 09-01-79 2-A*
O Cond Pump IPR &
Recire ITP-AXT.01.0 S 09-03-79 1-A 01-01-81 Main Feed Pump Turbines No Load Test & Pre-Op
//* of
- 99 2TP-PES.01.0 P 09 02-79 2-B 0
03-24-80 Emergency Diesel Generator Pre-Op Test p.g,yp ITP-GSS.01.0 S 09-04-79 0
09-23-80 Steam Scaling Sys j y Pre-Op Test OTP-SHV.01.0 S 09-07-79 1-A 06-23-80 Office & Service Bldg HVAC Pre-Op Test ITP-LOS.01.0 S 09-07-79 0
09-03-77 Lube Oil Storage Purif & Transfer Pre-Op Test ITP-TEH.02.0 S 09-07-79 0
Feedwater Heater Level Control / Turbine Extraction Isolation Pre-Op 2TP-CFS.01.0 P 09-07-79 2-B 0
09-07-80 Core Flooding System Check Vlv Operability Test
-A 2TP-RCS-14.0 P 09-07-79 c.
RCS Initial Fili Pre-Op Test
++
u REVISI'ON NO 19 DATE B-22-79 PAGE 15 HIDLAND PROJECT TEST PROCEDURE INDEX-DRAFT DUE DATE & PROC NO SO PROCEDURE RESP DRAFT REVIEW STATUS IMPLEMENT NUMBER & REV DISC DUE DUE SCOPE DRAFT DATE TITLE ITP-ESA.01.0 1 09-10-79 0
ESFAS Logic Sys Pre-Op Test ITP-ESA.02.0 I 09-10-79 0
ECCAS Logic Sys Pre-Op Test
-A OTP-AHV.04.0 S 09-11-79 o-05-08-81 Access Control &
Cor puter Arca HVAC Pre-Op 2TP-HUP.04.0 P 09-11-79 1-C 0
liigh Pressure Injection Enge 9, g,79 Safety Features y
Test OTP-MGH.01.0 S 09-14-79 2-B 0
04-25-80 Hiscellaneous Gas Supply (H2) System Test OTP-MSS.05.0 S 09-14-79 0
MS Cross Connect Valves OTP-RWS.01.0 P 09-14-79 2-B 0
03-27-80 Resia Storage &
Transfer Pre-Op ITP-EKD.01.0 E 09-14-79 0
04-02-80 Class 1-E DC Sys Pre-Op Test 2TP-EKD.01.0 E 09-14-79 1-C 0
03-21-80 Class 1-E DC Sys Pre-Op Test OSP-PRC.01.0 I 09-15-79 1-C 0
Programmable Controllers Checkout ITP-CRD.01.0 I 09-15-79 0
Contrs. :,d Drive Pre-Op Tes.
ITP-ICS.01.0 I 09-15-79 0
04-13-81 Open Loop Test ITP-NIS.01.0 1 09-15-79 0
In-Core Neutron Detector Elect Test 2TP-CRD.02.0 I 09-15-79 2-B 0
08-27-80 Control Rod Drive System Integrated Test
OTHE2 lEs7 BOY / U/ 77ES So T/'O
- v. Fuien um r M Ann r comeu ru r/o r Terrin e
-I8/79 uditjrea HEAT oN 0/em eiz
- e u o 77o' y resrias (see mned-up cng
- fa e Th Tasrwe E/ec
.Z'1 C
~~
~
VI B2A TID ^l b1 o N.
P/20 f enm &kco 7//EttinAL i
Ext'sasiOit])
ON TA/ N M E d 7 T g S 7~))O +
fe op.ggsyy
~
s ire shnenciir S
i eeh r:
1 MIDLAND PROJECT' O ' I O ' TI PRELIMINARY ENGINEERINGIPROCUREMENT p
PAGEbOF STATUS AS OP STARTUP SYSTEM PUNCHLIST i
SCHEDULED STARTUP SYSTEM: OW-/ - Atry It.;/sny e_si t -
TURNOVER DATE:
REV.:
item Description Comments and/or
]
Forecasted Completion Date -
i NATE.ElA.t_
' ' N TEM 7 A, oTE - 5061
/.
J-252 ole-SoaBA,&
d u t,
-l D
.,h i ;
10 -12.-77 j
o T c - s oc e, 2
J-2 5 l, ITca co s, orc v - e y3 :',
.I TEM G G, o Fe - 56/d'>
Jus fa ship 11-16 ~l'I
.;. :. a ;.e,
i 3.
-ii9 &, treg 94.6; $ - 3" H Bb -r,T duo 40 Uhif I
~'
1 4-M - 16 Z,0 c. - l Bi l O C - I E A d u '- D bi '
~i
'l 4
i l
5.
M-L-18,IIe/o S 1, oTN -3o90 A,&
d~e 6 I iP 12 ~ 'l ' ! I I TL.M 79, OX Y - Bd.- 7 A s l
T ' jf !lJ ;..',V. / *L- ] ~ /. U N D E C I ' n' b H/' ! la' l l '~_ (2t n th?E 6-01-79 i . z.H /\\ r.6 L l '.- ON 3506SO-) 8 - 2 c-7' t F ~ g 1 1,.' f, r. t,- o1-1 IOD : ?- J - S 63 - 2 o ~19 : i '. ON ISO @> O - I I $ g y r t M N I:.. L /jA eg - J o - i ct 2 i l. 9
MIDLAND PROJECT STATUS AS Or. I' I I I ~ PRELIMINARY ENGINEERINGIPROCUREMENT PAGE._2__ op STARTUP SYSTEM PUNCHLIST SCHEDULED S[ARTUP SYSTEM: O [~/,'. O TURNOVER DATE: REV.: ~ item Description Comments and/or Forecasted Completion Date EA)&lf)EE/L//JG - C OrdT' h 2. CABLES (R EPOP-T bhTC 8 - 5 ~/'1 ) ' V!d5C HbDULE b O Nh olo7 A oNA Flol B O r t/- S ! N7 C., ON A-oe,oS A Ol \\l, D &>D U U O t4 A D:' '6 C o N B712s A O t lib It ? 5 3 ON I SCOA o r tI s,oco ON I soI A on.T Go ! ^- 0111 60 IO , g ~; '. ?.C.: O All 'LO 2 C, '} ?l .,, 5
- O O N 3 013. A A A N i070 A -3 DN571 CIA o Nc. c7 o e.. ;
e
. l.
- a' SYSTEM COMPLETION SCHEDULES ACTIVITY TARGET COMPLETION DURATION PRIOR TO THE SCHEDULED SYSTEM TURNOVER ENGINEERING Complete electrical equipment 35 wks location & issue fdn. detnils Complete schemes, layout 26 wks drawings, & raceway schedule Complete routing of Cables &
22 wks cables schedule Complete connection list 17 wks Complete instrumentation in-sta11ation details 26 wk-Complete mechanical equip-52 wks ment location & issue fdn. details Complete system P&ID and isos 78 wks Complete design of HVAC duct 22 wks and supports l Complete HVAC equipment 35 wks j location & issue fdn. details f PROCURDIENT Delivery of equipment 40 vks Delivery of valves 26 wks Delivery of instruments 16 wks CONSTRUCTION Complete installation of 17 wks electrical equipment Complete installation of 15 wks raceway Complete pulling of 11 wks wire & cable Complete installation 7 wks of connections Complete installation of local instruments & tubing - 11 wks l .--4 -m ..,__-.,y,
o' ACTIVITY TARCET COMPLETION DURATION PRIOR TO THE SCHEDULED SYSTEM TURNOVER CONSTRUCTION-CONTINUE Complete installation of mechanical equipment 17 wks Complete installation of large pipe 15 wks valves 16 wks hangers 6 wks Complete installation of small pipe 12 wks valves 12 wks hangers 12 wks Complete hydrotests and proof flushing 7 wks Complete fabrication & installation of HVAC duct supports 8 wks Complete fabrication & installation of HVAC duct, diffusers, grills, dampers, etc. 8 wks Complete installation of HVAC valves & major equipment 8 wkg e p --r-- v,-,y w. - - -, ,y
l l!ii i t 'i Ii i,ii i y s 1 i
- 1
- i
..}i!.!i,ii! i2 i s j 3 ' i l 'I i i. s o R l .. L... i l 4 1 l a i ,: o I i i il i i i s l l l, V n <2
- 9 r
I j t f~B I l l lL : L E ] I !I i II i o i a u, - l 't lk l t 0 8 t r i. 2 --ty l 2 t l Is i I l% l 'l ( f d ? 1 i 3 'e i i E9 l ~ 8 i e i ')e 7 Q e i i !' W I(l ? 6 o l4 i i n i w I9 g>A i l mn s ~ ~ ~ hl S* OO t 's-K 4 (> P_ S d i' t l' E _4 p' W T l i 7 s i i s y s 3 O 2 6-I N, 3 ! W D L '( ) 8 e 9 i 6I1 4 ( 1 s 4 e i i -,._I- @-hQ. l C QGh ' , 000, O LE 8 b l f Eh l,iO h' I ? i i i [o lllj I i O a* ! i l @g J h Ii I d t=h. ..,_.. d g h h _. g k A..!. ..L.j.i ( _- a s k fL q ra ,Et a 't E sty
- w F:
E{ga x n e4e' D!d!rega!{ h tth.:(w7<r3t.-x;-{-- t i 4) c. ,v,3t,$+3 n !!{o t I IS u! tet: = >
- :k54
-e. c N, e 'd *C )'t(*44~gis$N's3 s y % 4 >& $ '3 ($ '?
- b b
l
- 4,
( s q i 3 )!$ j 3 o 9: t~v s 41 t131155? D,15)j h k 4 . t a si 5 44)ti'445 i -a~o. 4s=$$4 I a312 yi [ ij $ 9 4 l $,3: Et 2 t e19 o ~a <is, s e, - s <-s I ll i !!l Il .!IIl!'l :l i ! l i l, i i. l i.. ! ,i,!i'i t i..
c -~- 1, f 61TE*0Di&/70 * )' '~ t*ECHTEL JDO 7220 ofEFORT 01 ..$0RT hv SUBSYSTEM, UNIT, SCnED, ACTT. HIOLAND UNITS 1 &2 CONSuMEWS POaFR CGMPANY ? SYS1EM COMPLETION SCHEDULE STATUS l;! UNIT Sun-ScrF00LE ACTIVITV ACTIvtTV TARGET FORECAST mR REM A RK S NO SYSTEp4 NUMDER CUDL DESCHIPTION DATE DATE
- Q
'.,.,_.m,-. ~ ' 1 O FAA FA-1 TURNOVER DATF 12-7-79 /2 71 AUKILIARY BOILERS 14 1 e lI ~ .L.a. 1' ;. i. ..<-+--4.% j 0 FAA FA-t C0G1 CONS ELEC EQUIP $~10-7 9 - 9-2/=71 4 e l 0 _FAA,, . FA-l D00) .EkGR HAClaAY SCN. __ e-o-79_ 11 2/-79. 4 e 0 8AA FA-1 E001 CUNS NACE=AY 6-24-79 10 S. 11 4 ' "" - l 1 ' ~ 0~ ~ FAA ' FA-1 F001 ENrik CIRCu!T SCH ~~ 7-n-79' /2-2/- 79 ~ ' "~ " * ' ~ ' ~- # l ~ ~ 4
- . c 0
5AA FA-1 _ _GCol_ __.CUNS a!WE A CABLE __._.._9-21-79_ _./ d - 5~ _19 _. 4.._ _. f 0 FAA FA-1 N001 ENGR CONN LIST 8-10-79 /A-2/- 19 4 0 FAA FA-1 1001 CONS CONNECTIONS 10-19-79 // -3s-71 4._. ...,.,,......-~= n. O FAA FA-1 J001 ENGR INSTR LOCATE 6-6-79, .to- / - 19, _ 4 t 7 0 FAA FA-1 N001 CONS INSTRUMENTS 9-21-79 //-30-19 4 .. _ _ _ _...) - l.
- yo
, O FAA FA-1 MJ01 CuNS MFCN EQUIP 8-10-79 /0 79,,4. 4 / -2/ ~ 79 0 FAA FA-1 N001 ENGR SYST PLID/ ISO o-9-73 / 1-i 0 FAA FA-1 0001 ' CONS LPPG,VLV,NGWS' 8-24-79'
- 0 7 9 ~ a
~ e, i t- ,O FAA _ __ 0002, CON 3 LPPG,VLV,MGRS b 7 9 _ _ 10 - 2 (,- 19 __ 4, _,. _J FA-1 Ii 0 FAA FA-1 P001 CONS SPPG,vLV,HGRS 9-14-79 10 79 4 jt. 'O-24 79
- ~
~ ~ ~ '~ ' ~ ' ~ f 0 FAA ~ FA*1 P0b2 CONS SDPG,VLV,MGRS ~~ 9-14 79' / __ 0 __ FAA. FA-1 0001 _ CONS HYDRO /F LUSH,, 10-19-79 _ /t 79, a, _ . _ _ _. a.;. Y. }4 j e-0 FAA FA-1 R001 CONS INSULATION 11-30 79 t/ -Jo-7't ~~ ~ PIPE RACKS & OC-137,00-138 0 FAA FA-1 S001 N-152 3-7-79 9-/ 5'- 19 e 0 FAA FA=1 SG02 J-251 ITEM 65 4-7=79 // 79 e PRESSURE CONTROL VALVE j% PRESSURE *0NTROL VALVE (( O FAA FA-1 $003 J-251 ITEM 66 6-7-79 11-15-79 e ~ 6-7 79 10-12-79 ~ 3"NBD-CK'S .,r O FAA FA : 500s M-1198 ITEM 94.S' e SNUMS A1794 ~~ ~ ~ ~'PAGE 190 c
DATE 08/10/70 btCHTEL Job 7229 REPORT 01 1 SORT CT SUBSYSTEM, UNIT, SC5ED, ACTY MIDLAND UNITS 1 &2 CONSUMf P S PlimER COMP At4Y .] SYSTEM COMPLf. T ION SCHEDULE STATUS UN!! S ul,- StetEDULE ACTIVITf ACT1vlTY TARGET FORECAST eR R E 'M A Ra S M ^ NO SYSTEM N UM c:EW CUDE DESCRIPI!ON DATE DATE ..f,;* HVAC CONTNot DAMPERS ~. '.. a, O FAA FA-1 SOUS M-346 3 11EM 51,79 3-7-79 12-7-7f a i. e. I.. l. C, a. ~. .s 4 8.,., c.i7,l ..........s....'... e I 6.I
- l. t.-
,l i. [. ',l .I s t' - hi . _ I. _ _. _.. . _. -._} l _....gf l .a_, 3e I s i l ,'J .I - ~ PAGE 191 ' ~ ~ SNuMS A1794 I / -- ^ -w-g 9-g
PROJECT ENGINEERING / PROCUREMENT START UP SYSTEM / PUNCil LIST #6 N0. A .i P$.GE OF ___ SYSTEM 0-FAA Auxiliary Boiler i TURNOVER DATE: REV 8 7 Dec. 1979 FORECASTED 7 Dec 1979 a Co'mtENTS ) ITEM DESCRIPTION 7 I Engineering s -l. (0-FAA - H-430 Sh. 2) r i 1. Need pipe design for the following line numbers. 2h"-OllBD-651 l 2h"-OllBD-652 J 3"-0115D-654 ^ 3"-OllBD-656 ] 2h"-0JBD-580 i 4"-OllBD-654 4"-0JBD-392 2. Need hanger design for the following line numbers. 5 l 6"-0JUD-151 2h"-ollBD-651 6"-0JBD-157 2 h"-OllBD-652 I 4"-0CBD-223 24"-OHBD-491 j 10"-0GBD-223 4"-0JBD-392 / 8"-0GBD-371 3"-ollBD-656 14"-0JBD-516 2h"-0JBD-173 8"-0JBD-52D 4"-olluD-18p ,t^ 24"-03BD-580 3"-0GBD-249 4"-0118D-654 3"-OllBD-654 24"-OllBD-490 i l I s'. 7 l-i. ~ 1 . l M: 4 ]!i. g. 4
PROJECT ENGINEERING / PROCUREMENT START UP SYSTEM PUNCH LIST #6 Ha_. 1 SYSTEM 0-FAA Auxiliary Boiler TURNOVER DATE: REV 8 FORECASTED 7 Dec. 1979 7 Dec-1979 ITEM DESCRIPTION COMMENTS Engineering \\ - H-430 Sh. 143 i 1. Need pipe design for the following line numbers. ss.s F/c. ept / oec,ig - % lb gh, / 3"-011BD-654 ia f 3"-OllBD-656 - Tito 'l2' u iflo .l i 1 2. Need hanger design for the following line numbers. MMM [ [D 3"-OllBD-656 eg /g gf/ 14"-0JBD-516 ~ g / sol e c) 8"-0JBD-520 - Y /.. / a 4 y/s/ r-) Sh p 01111D-654 -- FoR. Oot L. EA-l[66D D65t@ oF DOCT [fnypogf 3 ,.. p4 $ l G f 4 (.' ) ) b bbbh I G7l
PROJECT EtlGItiEERING/ PROCUREMENT START UP SYSTEM PUNCH LIST 84 SYSTEta 0FAA > vil i t... i D Ii e' TURil0VER DATE: REV 7 7hM FORECASTED D" ' 7 9 ITEt4 DESCRIPTI0tl COMMENTS Et1GillEERIt4G p A-u.a s , mtes w g,, 1. ga_ _,_ y,,, I c>n r a is. <co.TI. 2. G le.cl l % % S L.,,.3 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ g g,,,,.g 3c g 3. l % ~<- Rw32 I C_ot off 9 2o.39 OA. OcH i: + 8 14CC Mod's - 0871 0872 molg \\se,4 4Q G fib O) C % ~lO PROCUREMEllT I n.,y A',!(, o d
- . I s u;b 2
Panel deliveries: P.O. At i E2 ETA E ~! [ OC137ocx6/ m iST rs,i OC219A P.O. 14-152 ETA 'l - I c) ~ ~ 6 N OC2198 P.O. M-lS2 ETA ~l-19 ll s,[>[s ::t -L/f..le[:'a s i '"lNH= i g C >C L x* 1 ,.i s,a a u,,c, t.. :
Suu-SYSTEM DETAlL SCHEDULE g %y$,,_ g[g[f,;,7;},,,-,,,;; JOB 7220 MIDLAND PROJECT, cm=Ta c=PT.R sog......;.;; START-U P SUB-BYST NO WLKOWN f/;,2-77
- TITLEh,
[h,h,hhhh,,,,,, TURNOVER,.),2,2 Y, ~1k(V,,[). ~ D ESCR I PTION G8 8AN1' TO ~ AU(5 SGPT DU Llov HEC. 1AM NOTES MECH EGu s PM E N T MILER Ho% i =f fMF 1 AUGU RENAIUlUG EQUIY LARGE plPE /d - -- - - --- -- -{ h LRG HANGERS p2. 3 ( &h -+I - - " - -, ~ LARGE VAIMES i BML PIPE /HNGR 9/I ~ - - - - ~ ( h C6USTKtXTIM TESTS YHfM C.T-8,Z,4*53 CT-1 FC-f C22 FC(;CTER:1,w V, INSTRUMENTS } } INSTR TUBING / ', 30 ^ /l "- INSTR TEST ~- ELECT EGulPMENT ~ ~ L'C' ~~-~ RACEWAY - ' '[ " ' ' ' ~ " ~ ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ '~ 8 ~ ' ' ' ~ WIRE & CABLE /M ~ '~ f ~- ~' ~ ~~~ ~ ' '~~ CONNECTIONS
- 50
-2 Q CHECKOUT h D ' g-h'- ~ W LKQOWN ~ ~ ~ - ' w C"k # [ -~ ' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ U ~~~ Q/ CIVIL, S/C. OTHERS ~ ~ ~ ' ~ ' &2 ' '. ~ ~ ~ ~. Q GC DOCUMENTION , A REMARKS AND ' RESTRAINTS - . 5EE_..A / tat'#MEMTS LATE, MATERIAL RESPONSIBLE ENGR. l) , STEM ETA MECH - d, 80RER ELEC
- EAM INGTR - k/ TA J/ of-
\\.- N ~ SCHEO D..'#HKrnnA ' N caC - ~ e
- .m OTHER-
.~ _ h -m6.'-..'**m e h-..-N..e...i. ..h==-*e .'e
MioLRND PRovect PREOPe' RAT 70NRL Test Sea.vence UNIT
- I UNIT
- L MIDLRND TEST SctfEDULE RCrit!/ TIES r
NRC SCHEDULE NRC ScttEDULE y TEST RcTIVITIES l l TEST RcTsusTIES EVENT l g ORTES g g i i i I I f.2.s - ro I g INITIRL. NSSS / RCS l .g yyygg FLUSH
- - g.zo.go y
op l I f"A#E NSSS l s.zt ro l N33S / RCS y g RCS COLD FLUSH g l og flYCRO TEST PMRSE l
- s. z,. go - g NSSS RCS / OTSG l
l HYDRO g
- q. Ao-90 g
l i - g.so.ro l I RCS COLD l l HYDRO TEST l go-21.ro I RCS / OTSG I l O MYORO l l HOT - - - - - - - OSIS - - i- !!-20*10 I FUNCTIONR L i l TEST g 1-n-ro - ; I HOT CON TRINMENT Q FUNCTIO N R L ILRT g g TES TING. g g l z-s-vr l - -,,o I-z-ov-st l - 390 _ _ l ILRT/ SIT l_,,,,,, g Q CONTAINM EN T l Q 'I s-s-vt - I ILRT l-3-rs.rt t ILRT / SIT l__ FUNCTIONitL HOT i I O COMPLE TE TEST FUNCTIONRL l g,. pg. gg __ l BRSELINE TES TING l 1 POST HFT INSPECTION ' # A '"' l _ gs;.r), - RPPLIC HN T l COMPLETE 1 3 1,.,g _ l BRSELINE ESFRS l_, _, _,, _ l ESFRS l SUBMITS TEST RESULTS RNO l INSPECTION . POST ffFT l g %mJ EVALURYl0 N BRSE LINE l-s- s r-ri -g - - 7,co - - - - - - - - 74 00 - - l 'W ~ RPPLICRNT g g SUBMITS TEST Q g RESULTS AND NOM
- Q TewfMES n
EVAL UR TION I /i.1.r. r I nesor.ve puncreusr --l FUEL LORO l_,,_,,,, g
- 97gug, CONSVM H* R S POWCR C O.
1 141DL R N D PRO TEC 1" N Z./7. tTO#NJTON 9- //- 79 N n
-~ ATTACHMENT 3, COMPARISON OF TEST PROGRAM BASIS 1 2 3 4 5 lv 6 Original test Test program commences Total testing Unit 2 Fuel Load-Unit 1 Fuel Load-schedule sequence early May, 1979 duration-30 months Nov. 1980 Nov. 1981 chtel Original test Test program commences Total testing Unit 2 Fuel Load-Unit 1 Fuel Load- [oposal schedule sequence early Aug., 1979 duration-27 months Feb., 1981 Nov., 1981 v7 Proposed merged Test program commences Total testing Unit 2 Fuel Load-Unit 1 Fuel Load-test program early Aug., 1979 duration-27 months July, 1981 Nov., 1981 e e .6
Y w ~ 4 's ury 79 aEv i owa JOB 7220 MIDLAND. PROJECT i ' FORECAST G: SCHEDULE f
- i -
i :.., ip T Y P.1C A L. STARTL UP SUB-SYSTEM SCHED'ULE RITERI A [, l i SEEKS TO S/U SU B-SYSTEM ' TU RNOVER ~ l,0. y y : T t '6; 4
- 9. V 9
i 22120 1,9'i,81,7 16 I,5 1,4 13 12 Il 3,0 2,9 2p 27 26 2p 2,4 2,3, 3 g l '~! ~ l;, .'..i, s s I'. 6 t ' t g'f ' VLV LRG SML i JPF PG LR ? PIP p. EQ g INSTR l NG hl,, .f .,i [.1 i j j i I ,{ ,1 + .!i i l' i ).!!! l i )j;gi'! + I I i /zh 3 4 i i j; j. r U$ ;h h l 2 J REVIEW ds, j op j
- o. 3:
FIN L mg PUNCHLIST o-l 5 ' REVIEW SU8-SYST. OHy' S U B-SYST. Dr DW Ii'D'm b REVIEW x m o x <o WORKOFF Z i . DE; Tall SCHLD. MONTHLY p<" DETAIL SCHLD, mz
- $2 z-m 8
o._; $z :,I x WEEKLY o zo O4 b.6,$COMMENT .t i. 2
- L *
- i.
w n. oo 3: i O-i ( k , ( i,! f, l i l i 4 i l
- l',.I
-.t i I i t I l 4 i I l e g i,. i. t ; ,.t 1 I ./ ...~.,...l.. i 7.,...... n,. ..,,. i t o .I j,, i,. 3.i 8 ... : j, .J.. ..,A ,i.,, i. lhI
- l I,!
g..l..,t,.,a'1 ..pjrl I l .f f. ..p _. ',l.. i .. 1 i !;.i.,4!..: li, i. i
- .....p.p s.y f,.. i,
- ., i.
i i.,. i .,j - l,. .. t ,i , i_ .,, 9 . t... ;.. / [. 2.. ,.J....I;.,.jj.,.tj.,.;t',
- ,..,. 3
._: i o. ..I. -. 4;c H :. t !.. 3 l, {i 5,p .4 t i ; t 3p... ; j t.,I.. { i ;: -l rii-3.,,.-,._ .m ...m.. n. _.. ;. 4 ., _ -_-.p<. y....l 1 i t j.;.. i, .g .c.. - +, - 4,., ,.lt.,__t,[..q, g },.,, z, i..
- n.,.
ii,.p.i.,: g-
? $7/p4ANb l f'_e7 h $ ORA TED.. LNo4 TER - 37DAs96f . / A d KJ. ~ f Y E/?pMA)EM T. fAAAT OEU ATElk ! A & SY.f77m - - lSedi.s co f4EOPEttartex;+ L Nsr/a6 02c Gum ~ A%.reo n o,, a n<erew.cr (.rmme has r'rere-m). %(3rhttreo) NDb< 1b 8e 9-fo-79 sh cr;ca AYt ose ~ f*La c?., To Atruc.r f Atr4>d 7 H~ E M s & Pc u.; iso d es A s /&Gutteo. ~ l'd K G c r S eit eu at E . ]d s eJ ~ JefftpJLf $h PO50 (Cd ~ ~. $ r'f Eco t. E SuryNCEpcf ) /ecs.s c e=. cE t d _ kJ7/t10 K $CPCL.7 ~ Geena (scamanosas sures Enem-) /ws ce I UUf CF
- UCCAN. US[4> /f//J6 ~ h /C t/f tt'5fZ naPexFK- &JM-
. m.r.r a cceri e a Eers,cr -Ace.,1177 _ - . - - -... - - - - -. - - - - - -. -. - - -. - - - - - -. ~ - -. - - -. - - -. - - -. - - - - - - e-a-=-we ,e a= --ew--* w- -*m++-n-
- h
- ---*-**.-F'--.w-e.*
a-* +-* - -
- 6
-W e.-.- =*- e e- - - = ,,___g e., . - - = -. = - - - =-4 -~- <--+-e ---==---m=+-***.==*+---~*---~~*e
- e-
- - - =. * *
--=* ,__~_,.--n e .h.- m.- - ' + = e.---* - *+ 1_
A q.; r-7? = AGENDA 1. Applicant's Specific Design Decisions for Midland a. Incorporating TMI-2 Effects b. Resulting from NRC's Open Items 1/ rom Midland Review f Applicant's Need for Staff heedback Prior to Documentation c. of Design Changes 2. Impact of Short and Long-Term " Lessons Learned" for Midland 3. Other Matters Impacting Midland a. Status of Staff's Safety Review for Midland (1) Critical Path Areas (RSB & ICSB) (2) Areas in Need of Early Resolution 4 (3) Assignment of Staff Reviewers and Use of Contractors (4) Applicant's View Regarding Documentation of Deviations from SRP Acceptance Criteria b.. Seismic Issue and Soils Settlement Issue c. Caseload Forecast Panel Meeting Results een d. Status of Draft Environmental Stateyent 2/ Listed in Staff's letter of March 31, 1979 9 if ,,,,e
0 q y7 7 o~ MIDLA'lD PLAIi? Status of IIRC Open Items (NRC Letter of !! arch 31, 1979) Total Open Items 126 Submitted by CPCo - Avaiting staff review 57 Submitted by CPCo - Accepted by staff 9 Major design decisions made - Submittals contingent upon finalization 12 of design Analytical programs in process - Submittals upon completion of programs 6 Remaining items to be submitted - Presently under review by CPCo a. Involving documentation 26 b. Involving potential issue's 16 0 JJE 9/26/79 e 0
r - -w s --3 .g..s MIDLAND NUCLEAR SAFETY TASK. FORCE (NSTF) ACTIVITIES I. INTRODUCTION A. NSTF formed April 27, 1979 B. To consolidate ongoing safety review of the Midland Plant and to assure that we determine and properly take into account the implica-tions of the TMI-2 accident. C. Consists of eleven engineers from Engineering Services, Quality Assurance, Midland Project and Midland Operating Staff. Multidiscipline group including nuclear, mechanical, electrical, I & C and chemical. D. B&W and Bechtel personnel specifically assigned to this effort as well as other outside consultants. II. PRIMARY TASKS A. Technical Evaluation and Reconmendations on Safety-Related Items: ~ Undertaken studies en approximately thirty-five items identified 1. after reviewing the TMI-2 accident. 2. Spans prevention, detection and mitigation of accidents as well as plant response after accident mitigation. 3. Efforts also include selected open items previously identified during the Midland licensing review. B. Plant Systems Analyses: 1. Expanded ongoing analysis of operating events. 2. Safety and operational sequence analyses. 3. Reliability assessment of AFW. h. Participating in analytical efforts on 17T B&W plants including small breaks, inadequate core cooling, abnormal transients, FMEA of ICS. 5 Conducting other analyses as determined necessary. C. Technical Assessment of Design Documentation: 1. Safety-related equipment qualification review. 2. Interface criteria review. O e
2 D. Assessment of Impact of These Efforts on Testing and Operation: 1. Performance testing of equipment. 2. Liaison and input to testing and operating staffs. 3. Operating Department has initiated efforts to improve emergency response plans, operation and training at our nuclear plants. E. Participate in Industry Efforts Related to TMI-2: 1. CP Co is participating actively in EEI, AIF and EPRI efforts. ~ 2. NSTF is participating in B&W Owners Groups. 3. TJSullivan is a member of AIF Subcommittee on Plant Recovery and assisted at the TMI site following the accident. DASommers is participating in NRC-ANS-AIF effort on post-accident monitoring. III.
SUMMARY
A. NRC Items: 1. NUREG-0578 contains short-term recommendations for approximately 13 design changes and h categories of analyses or tests. Of the design changes, five are part of the Midland pre-TMI design, six are being implemented and two are under investigation. Analytical and testing efforts are underway. 2. We are proceeding with detailed design of RCS vents and procurement of higher-range containment pressure and water level nenitors. Con-tainment hydrogen monitoring was provided in the pre-TMI design. 3. Other Bulletins and Orders contained analytical and design require-ments for operating B&W 177 plants. We are participating in analytical l efforts. We are proceeding with safety grade detailed design of l Anticipatory Reactor Trips and automatic RC pump trip for required events. Most required AFW modifications were already part of or not applicable to Midland except flow indication i graded to lE. which is being up- ,B. Other Items - CP Co has decided to proceed with modifications associated i with: i 1. Safety-grade cold' shutdown capability
- 2.
Unitization of AFW suction piping 3. Overpressure protection at lov temperatures i h. ESF pump room filtration 5 DER letdown valve operators qualified for submerged operation. l 6. Upgrade CCW to RCP seals TJS - 9/2h/79 ---c e.
< n. -~ 8. Recent CP Co Actione and CFR Open Iters and TMI-2 Issues 1. CP Co Manager.ent has decided to factor into F/C #6 the following changes in the Project scope: A. Safety Grade Cold Shutdown Capability B. Upgrade Pressurizer Heaters C. Modifications to Aux Feedwater Suction and Discharge Configuration D. Overpressure Protection at Low Temperature E. Upgr:de of CCW to RCP Seals F. PORV Position Indication G. Aux Feedwater Autostart and Flow Indication H. Venting Capability of Wimary Loop I. ESF Pump Roo Filtration J. DHR Letdown Valves - Submersible Operators s
a p ,e a yn " k Bn MA h % ~u i.f a/np ys JA< Q /* G
- =s,
&MW gW @. M y 4fM1 %/,W h-W pJn-l Pad 8 - -- = - - -..., _, _,,, _ __ /
J*, Information Request for B&'f Plants Under Construction Ph')In) U n2.L System / Component Design Comaonent Component ConstrNion Completed Protarement Fabrication Completed (%){[2 (%) /J, (") [j () HPI System ~ fno f[- ' ' ' IO~ Y 7' 7 EFW System Ie0 DHR System io g_[ I "l D CFT System io0 /, a _ RCS Pressure 99 Control System 7 l' Makeup / Letdown joO f System g. SG Pressure I g Control System f I' Steam Generator loD 4O Pressurizer 10 0 5O 0 Y Quench Tank l0 V tr c,Ju % IW to* 't o &D l*0 il^"* 1 50 pt c 5 f,'Q 1 i Not es : p~ali.sL-< 5 f .-l W b : h~s../ L y,LQ l k 2. n w /wm .. s j n h a Ac. p,, - l.E M q'. &v,,h n Aw/s,p pq i - J 4 :. y a /, e _. ~t.L,1cs %,~
- f. -
,. i i n.g, _ .7.. - ~ h tN Q m <,y. 11 k< t. J.l~; n /3 %4 j.n p-/ 4 u n, : e, H v n c,,.. rpbt.i-. v'A n pn r uai./, a n,i...,, a,. t,. c-
~ n/z z/7.i Information Request for B&M Plants Under Construction (nidlod L)hil L System / Component Design Cowonent Component l Constrm tion Completed Procurement Fabrica tion Comi'le !.*d (*) /.I /2. (%) /J, .. _ ' _(3 /l ( _.t __.g HPI System l " 7'~Y3 ~ 'I I I 6 EFW System DHR System /0 7 t' CFT System I f r, RCS Pressure 70 (* f ' Control System 7< Makeup / Letdown jeo System I f 3,,, j (e SG Pressure Control System Steam Generator / o ') (.' I 8 Pressurizer I"" l N /" i Quench Tank c:. M I R..,, Lay,,1 i,~ 90 ?o 7: " 'RCS firin g ioo qs - / o u 9(' "( U ' holes: k VJl k tid 2 dw^~ p<.L. k h f~d( c5 aj~ ~,/ p,,.,.., g,j, y{ g_ ll - 6 y Jfuu n 4 v /sy<.,)Lg.~-<r F h.7~.:. /,l, u...., / Aw "L~. J~../ x, n.ic3,,,, re.r 2 A l 's N 5 f1 fe el i,t N f g d n m T.NLabftVcsi ,i. r Hvs c a.La,. vA s u %.n- + ,brJ 30-3f% 4
....s j- . _a s .....s ..t Tile B Al.l. STIREI' JOURNAL FCOHSumeTS Potter Jurnps Estimated Cost Spanish Air 'l unJu. J:m. 29. 1980 n f Nuclear Plant to Serve Dow Chemical -e WHEN i f% s.,a wau.stnutJoen: eat sta// Jeeportee to produce a delmitive estimate qi costs and q) l MIDLAND. I tich.-Consumers Power Co. production schedules by March. s,aw*LLsrasstJ 1 reported a neardoubhng in estimated costs The new delays and cost increases repre. WASHINGTON - .- 5 of its troubled nuclear pcwer project here sent just the latest in a lengthy series of charging Boeing Co. and proiected new delays that jeopardue construction delays and cost increases for tzons of U.S. antitrus the venture's survival. the plant. The project has been plagued by rnilhon in damages. The much, delayed, muchdisputed 13-problems! environmentalists have fought it; In Seattle. a spoh Ta yearold project, into which Consumers federal permits came slowly; and. for a the company hasn't 3 Power already has pumped 11.3 bilhon, was time. Consumers Power even ran short of to thoroughly review intended both to power generators for Con-money to budd it. added. however. that hy7 ant $nubh sumers Power and to produce steam for use All of this created a substantial amount " good defenses" for a by Dow Chemical Co. in its huge chemical of discord between Consumers and Dow, company believes tt un. orNshed f acts-discreetty. conn. une.a y and economicany-wnd give you manufacturing complex here. Dow was to be which has been counting on the nuclear pro.
- rrusunderstanding c n
m2 0tnective and essentiahnformation the plant's biggest customer, and its agree-ject to replace the aging fossil fuel genera-quest:en." .Nn dh'nion a h ment to buy the steam was a key reason for tors at its Midland complex.Dow has esti. The suit. filed it building the plant. mated that those plants can't be run past here,. also names t g Band. The airlme sa 3 fjefore you recomt.. end ot take action nn a joint venture, an acouisition. a m.rg- %1ule Dow didn't have any immediate 19M. ar. an investment or tax sneuer oppor-comment on Consumers Power's new pro-With tha nuclear project under way. Dow agency was include g 'uruty. an important new executive or jections, it was clear that the plant won't be has been trying to avoid major outlays at nearly $39 million in - 1sh national carrier g able to deliver the steam to Dow before Dec. the old plants. This has led to a lengthy dis. ea$iu nd u coupon-23 Boeing mm y
- 31. 1934 the date after which Dow can pull pute between Dow and the Environmental p
e about $231.1 milhon. 3 BISHOP'S SERVICE. lNC. out of its contract to buy steam from the Protection Agency. which has been pressur. vv..a.ao ca e.m...oo.ae w.
- c. iese plant.
ing Dow to clean up allegedly dirty emis. At the heart,cf th g n missions Boetag 15 A Dow spokesman said company oth-sions from its old units. Just last week, the %FW toest veas ***eGioac LoS A8eGEtts. e8 hts 5ELs Cials. surprised When Consumers disclosed EPA filed suit in federal district court in I'O D8.I D 8* [ WsM.M9 l the neW estimates yesterday, were meeting Michigan seeking more than II dllion ID gg It East 42nd Street New Yort.NY toot? .l to decide what to do. A spokesman for Con-fines and an order for Dow to. ply with oFSS E. N of the first 16 a.t pa ircra
- 2.est2700 i sumers acknowledged that the utihty didn't state clean air rules.
a t t wo n give Dow any aivance warning and said it In 19M Dow began pressing Consumers ,g'_- mi siae mor..aeornist.on atious your.rv.c, had dispatched officials to discuss the new for additional guarantees and sought a firm ano h p date (which became known as the "diep g , eh A [*' report. For its part. Consumers said it received dead" date) after which it could pu!! out of kut !berta said a revisa! cost estimate and construction the project if the nuclear plant wasn't fin-Boeing had paid m 2 , schedule last week from Bechtel Power ished. As the dispute turned bitter. Consum- 'Mr. Amador in cor. "" l Corp.. its prime contractor. Consumers said 'ers threatened to rue for hundreds of mil' purchases of the ) =, z _, j Bechtel estimated its contracting costs lions of dollars Lf Dow did pull out of the -r would rise to 11.59 billion from a 1976 esti-project. l mate of 1947 million. Consumers said this in a bid to avoid a complete break, the 4 would raise the total price for tne power two companies in 1978 renegotiated their plant to 13.1 billion from a previously esti-contracts. Under the revision. Dow can pull . [a - gj 5 Ei mated 11.67 billion. out of the project if the plant can't deliver When the project was announced in De-steam by Dec. 31,19M. or five months be-g ~ ~ g j ll E,.k-tember 1967, the estimated price was 1349 fore the plant currently is projected to have . g g million. and the plant was to be completed that capability. If Dow does withdraw from j g< - t ' in 195. f the project, though it will be liable to Con- -J .c (([hg. 4 g,y mu; l Consumers added that Bechtel's current sumers for D0 million to more than !:00 projection is for nuclear fuel to be loaded million in penalties. depending on how much = .F0 l into the first of two units in April 1964 of the plant is completed. 9 q i_ yi i'; Y(.'." l nearly three years later than the previously O m forecast June 531. The second unit, which =., was tr. tended to produce steam for Dow. Cryiral oriainals from the Howard 50% ers l won't be loaded until september 1984. After .a j Cdect'mn. Each cre ated completely by they are loaded, the rese* ors are scheduled q . M... = hand.On 18" 14K gold chain.560.On for some eight mew si testing before they (-:. i i sterling silver or. guld filled chain. go 12ito product %
- N unuts said.
d S M.Shown actualsize. In San rth. BecW.41d Consum-Ploe enddindicatechlid14K.SS.GF) us N r r e e "uct:rn of an on- .A, 4 Arple Heart Acom AMishroom changcy @c trocess" that has re-s z Strawberry tceCube __ Teardrop quired uges , afays in the project. w O visa O Mc 0 AMX. O Check "The tarertalnty of federal reg 21stney re-i qulrements, particularly since the accident 4 a Card 8 - Exp. l at Three Mlle Island, has made it very dif- ~ Nnw ticult and sometimes impossible to accu-W_ ritely forecast their impact u. a the final l O '"' l ' cost or completion date of the project." Be-a I chtel said. y Chy-Sc, 7;p. Imowledged that the new estimates were .a In a statement. Consumers Power ac e .E f. EIMI ir anamEn i
0 9.& m toproduce a d!!ingtMe es!!mEe Q u. charging Bonng Co. witn MHI.%ffM Frt a. product 2cn schedules by March.The w ALLFiatt? JocCzst staff frrpo tce r 9 MIDI.AND. Mich. Consumers Powtr Co. for trulhon m damages. t here sent just the lat:st in a Sea DIG reported a neardoubling in estimated costs construction delays and cost Ir. creases in Seattle, a spokesma l gued the comp 4ny hasn't ye of its troubled nuclear power projecand projected new the plant. The project has been p a ht it, dite problems: environmentajists hav / to coroughly review lb short of added. however, that Bo [ 3, the venture's survival. much, delayed, snuch415puted 13-which Consumers - 3 t1rne. Consumers Power even ran " good defenses" for N' company beheves the nt ' il The of discord between Cons money to bu11d it. year Did project, into STa Power already has pumped !!.3 bilhon, was " misunderstanding o
- Dow, for Con-intended both to power generators lear pro. wescon."
f se sumers Power and to produce steam or u which has been counting on the nucif el genera. The suit filed in ical by Dow Chemical Co. In its huge chemmanuf acturin ject to replace the aging fosst uDow has esti. here, also names the h t be Bank. The alrhn tors at its Midland compln.. mated tha past ub$ un-d its agree-agency was includ M.Nti.shedfacts-d.screeuy coanogweyou the plant s biggest customer, anment to buy the steam wa nts nearly S39 milhon in has been trying to avoid majo .t,aity ano economicah--antormation ish nationalCarrie 19M. t r oo,@ect<ve ano essentiaOna@ comment on Consumers Power's rew pWlule D l gthy dis. 3 Boeing mm aic building the plant, ro-r% ou"cenrecomrneno or take sctron the old plants.This has led to a en ntal about $231.1 milho d pute between Dow and the Environme 't be At the_ heart o jections,it was clear that the plant won Be'orsy t on amerg-r Protecton Agency, which has been press Dec. 00'IDI IS i a toint ventu e. an acow. i.mWestment or tax s euer oopor. able to deliver the steam to Dow beforwhich Dow can pull r mis. I58IO"3 ing Dow to clean up allegedly dirty e n k the ;;*genct Amador M executm o' f m the 2nitt en important new 31,19M. the date afterout of its contract to buy steam ro sions from its old units. Just last wee, in e lu?o coupone EPA filed suit in federal district c in ; niiates. '[" E Michigan seeking more than "gg3 g offi-Pt A Dow spokesman said company r ih og .OISHOP'S SERVICE,lNC.w +=a..n.w w.e = = w u w. disclosed plant. .E cials, surprised when Consumers re rneeting the new estimates yesterday, weto decide what to do. A in 1974 Dow began pressing Consum another Spa $1sh state clean air rules.
- r for Con-n,am
,,mo=4 was a.oro tosecursewssetsws3.s.1/29 fm for additonal guarantees and sought a i h didn't S'A which Mr Ar ' sumers acknowledged that the uti tywarning and said it dp date Iwhich became known as t Boetng had paid t of jjut Iberia sad SYee Nork NY 0017 dead" date) after which it could puu ou giVe Dow any advanced officials to discuss the new asn't im-c Mr. Amador in the project if the nuclear plant w g . f ;; had dispatche r wvice..; i d Consum-f mil' purchases of the rir,ser 27eo nabout you For its 'part, Consumers said it rece ve ished. As the dispute turned bitt ha.i d usmoreinformatso report. p;j a revised cost estimate and construction l Power schedult last week from Bechte costs lions of dc!!ars il Dow did pu M ;j Corp.,its prime contractor. Consumers said in a bid to avoid a complete break, t g., (****" project. [e contracting e .U * : i ted their l estimated its 1976 esti' two companies in 1978 renept ama. would rise to $1.59 billion from amate of 1 ll ...J.'.; Bechte d this e c= v 't dehver ,,i,,,,, would raise the total price for the power out of the project if the plant can ths be-C a previously esti-steam by Dec. 31,19M. or fiv 6... have plant to 13.1 billion from withdraw from -.Q, yg De-mated 11.67 bilhon.When the project was announced in that capabthty. If Dow doesthe p ble to Con-f was 1349 w cember 1%7, the estimated pricemilhon, and the p y 11 leted legp vliL much g - sumers for 150 million tomillion in l Oa LL. N,. ; O. Y -[. ?, nt Consumers added that Bechtel's curre of the plant is completed. in 1975 be loaded /141-G'# 1 ' ..3~ ' g/ ' project 20n is for nuclear fuel to l..'. l 19M. -.J % into the Drst of two units in Aprt ?; iously f,y_ r* ,( ' 'q nearly three years later than the prevforecast Ju hich
- Jf 7
W G for Dow, %Y- -.. ON + was intended to produce steam 19M. After ?...!'c l ~ M J' b l ' ' (' ' ' ' won't be loaded until Septem ere scheduled [, - J'I '- they are loaded, the reactors ar they for some eight months of testing before .. ',,7 gl I CrywaloriginalsfromtheHowardSowers d gointo production Consumers sai. Colleoion.Each erested compichly byhand.On 13" I4K goldchain.560.O id Coosum- ,.g 4 .In San Francisco. Bechtel sa f an ever-werling siheeor goldfdinichain,( 3l ers Power has been the " victim ochanging regul has re- $24.Shomiaaualsi:c.,; - the project. Il Plemend.ilndiarechain14K,55.GF) Ante _ Heart Acom _Mmhro quired changes and delays in"The uncertainty of fe y re. epy he accident 'f S quirements, particularly since t Cube Teardrop y dif- ..p r, at Three Mile Island, has made it ver 5crawberry lceOMce O AMX OCheck accu- + ficult and sometimes impossible to 1'OvisA the fmal 4 :e h Exp. - rately forecast their impact uponcost or complet 'g.,.I.j ' " Be-T'- j i' Card # V@'; N 4 W .. ? e
- ',,i r
j f'- chtel said. statement. Consumers Power ac- ,h , la be f'7 5 were N knowledged that the new estimates Addren g*' ~~p'P.' in a f what y.g. N I Cin based on a preliminary projection oi sion's ti- ~.. a >G 3 y-.. - the Nuclear Regulatory Comm s .,;yh.y, re w .l censing requiremets for the plant a . g. uire-pected to be on completion. "NRC req ,,;i, j.,. Q, math of the nuclear accident at Three ' p"p, ty the ments are in a complete state of flux" in / l
- 4,,
5c. 2t% FairhmnGrtte. Aclansa.GA W v Mile Island last year, a Consumers Power ',.? - s I OMDERTOLLFREEwo.5:wso.E.u.1246 1 r, ,,.c official said. or.. f p,,.4,,,,,%,,,,% , _ a ter J ',"6 A company spokesman said in response .l , h L + xpects l ~ + to questions that Consumers Power e
- e s
/4 , ',4 Brass Discloses h~dhh, g 9 v. . w.- Q,l .es ~
y MEETING WITH NRC STAFF JUNE 13. 1980 OBJECTIVE To Review Backg ound, New Organization and Current Cost / Schedule Reconciliation and to Gain Input for Assessment of Licensing Schedule AGENDA I, Midland Plant Status and Background A. General Description and History B. Finance Hearings (MPSC) and Plans C. State and Local Activities D. Midland Response to TMI II. Midland Cost and Schedule A. Status of Engineering and Construction ~B. Scope / Schedule Analysis Process C. Scope Definition D. Reconciliation with Previous Estimates E. Action Plan to Complete Construction
- III, Licensing Schedule Assessment and Resumption of Midland Docket Review A.
Bases for Midland Priority B. CP Co Schedule Assessment C. Midland Review Plan Elements D. NRC Input E. Determine Follow-up Actions j IV. Midlan', Licensing Issues A. Soils B. Resolution of Separate Task Force and 50.5hf Items C. Emergency Planning D. Transfer of Technical Issues from Region III to NRR V, Midland Project Reorganization A. CP Co - General Office and Site B. Bechtel - Ann Arbor C. QA 4 '#^^ ._s" TJS - 6/10/80 ///
. 7? G <f.20 MIDLAND REVIEW PLAN OBJECTIVE TO FACILITATE COMPLETION OF NRC REVIEW OF THE MIDLAND ER AND FSAR LEADING TO TIMELY ISSUANCE OF THE DES /FES AND SER/SSER. POLICY ELEMENTS 4 9 UTILIZE THE STRENGTHENED NRC PROJECT MANAGEMENT CONCEPT AND REORGANIZED CP CO MIDLAND PROJECT TO FACILITATE COMPLETION OF THE OVERALL ENVIRONMENTAL AND SAFETY REVIEW e ESTABLISH MIDLAND-SPECIFIC BACKFIT CRITERIA 9 MAINTAIN AND UTILIZE SER OPEN ITEMS LIST l l S MAKE MAXIMUM USE OF NRC REVIEW ALREADY COMPLETED G SCHEDULE REGULAR MANAGEMENT-LEVEL MEETINGS FOR PLANNING, PROGRESS REVIEW AND DECISION MAKING G CONDUCT SEPERATE HEARINGS AS NECESSARY ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL AREA AND OTHER MAJOR SEPARABLE ISSUES SUCH AS SOILS TO ALLOW EARLY RESOLUTION t ,f" I
. sw MIDLAND REVIEW PLAN PROCEDURAL ELEMENTS ONGOING LICENSING ACTIVITIES S ITEMlZE AND RESOLVE SCHEDULE CRITICAL HARDWARE ITEMS EARLY TO ALLOW OPTIMAL DESIGN AND TO MINIMlZE APPEALS 9 DETERMINE Af0 IMPLEMENT MIDLAND SPECIFIC RESOLUTION OF l B&W - GENERIC POST - TMi lSSUES SUCH AS SENSITIVITY AND NUREC-0667 e CP CO CONTINUE TO RESPOND TO REQUESTS FOR INFORM ATION AND UPDATE FSAR S NRC CONTINUE TO IDENTIFY ORGANIZATIONS AND INDIVIDUALS REVIEWING FSAR SECTIONS OR SPECIFIC ISSUES l l
? MIDLAND REVIEW PLAN PROCEDURAL ELEMENTS RESUMPTION OF FORMAL DOCKET REVIEW G NRC FORM REVIEW TEAM AND ASSIGN REVIEWERS UTILIZING THOSE FAMILIAR WITH MIDLAND DESIGN TO THEGREATEST POSSIBLE EXTENT G NRC INCORPORATE SUBMITTED FSAR REVISIONS AND PROVIDE BACKGROUND INFORMATION TO ASSIGNED REVIEWERS l 9 CP CO ASSIST IN FAMILIARIZING REVIEWERS WITH MIDLAND DESIGN 9 DEFINE SCOPE AND PRIORITY OF REVIEW TO BE COMPLETED, l MAINTAINING CONTINUITY WITH PREVIOUS EFFORTS S CP CO SUBMIT REPORT PROVIDING STATUS OF OPEN ITEMS AND i APPLICABLE NUREG-0660 ITEMS AS WELL AS CROSS-REFERENCE TO APPROPRIATE FSAR SECTIONS l 9 EXPEDITE COMMUNICATIONS l
j $1NUTE'S - Meating batw22n NRC and Conzumsrs P)wer Comptny relative to MRC review of Midland OL Applicatlan The Meeting was callad to order at 9:00 a.m. on June 13, 1980, by D.S. 4 Hood, NRC Midland Project Manager. Present from the NRC were R. Purple (Deputy Director Division of Licensing), R. Tedesco (Assistant Director Division of Licensing), A. Schwencer (Acting Chief Licensing Branch 3),
- 2. Mattson, W. Lovelace, D. Scaletti, W. Haass, J. Kimball, W. Olmstead,
and W. Paton. Present from Consumers Power Ccmpany were S. Howell, J. Cook, G. 'Keeley, T. Sullivan, D. Budzik, M. Miller, and J. Brunner. Af ter introducing the Consumers people, Mr. Howell briefly reviewed the history of the Midland-project, noting that it is -the oldest plant in the re-view chain. Howell explained the reason for Consumers Power Company's decision to site the plant at Midland, namely - the supply of process steam to Dow Chemical, and pointed out, that the siting choice was in line with government policies en-couraging cogeneration and pollution reducticn. Howell further stated that the Midland project has the apparent support of the state, Dow Chemical, the HPSC, and the governor. He noted that the overt opposition of the Actorney General is consistent with the AG's political opposition to all moves on the part of Censumers Power Company. Howell assured those present that Consumers Power Company is having no financial difficulties with Midland construction at the present ti=e, but that securities hearings - as opposed to rate hearings-at the MPSC are complicated by interventions by anti-nuke interests. With regard to licensing, Howell stated that Consumers does not blame all delays which have occurred on the accident at TMI-2. Rather, a multiplicity of facters including pre-and-post TMI-2 regulatory changes have delayed Midland. Howell centioned that based on actual experience with other projects of similar vintage, initial projections of Midland lag times had ~been reasonable at the time they were made. Finally, Howell pointed to Consumers record in conscien-tiously applying the NRC's post Crystal River and TMI-2 experience, including a decision to coc=it to NUREG 0578, an aggressive response to 50.54f questions on B & W sensitivity, and continued monitoring of other TMI-2 requirements. Leading to the matter to be discussed by the next Consumers speaker, Howell stated that Consumers Power Company had reviewed its schedule and cost projections in a detailed, manner. Following his introduction, Mr. Cook deconstrated graphically the increase in regulations to which Midland is subject. This prompted a question from Mr. Tedesco of the NRC staff concerning the extent to which scheduling delays could be attributed to TMI-2. Cook, Howell, Keeley, and.Sullivan repeated Howell's earlier point'that Consumers Power Company did not regard TMI-2 as the only delay factor. All pointed to the watershed effect of increased regulatory re-quirements on plant design and construction. In apparent response to Howell's and Cook's responses to Tedesco's question, Mr. Mattson of the staff mentioned an earlier agreement between the NRC and Consumers Power Company ' relating to Consumers' review of Regulatory Guides. Mattson also specifically stated that the NRC policy on implementation dates ,vas to avoid placing construction requirements beyond those for operating plants if delayed ctart-up would result. (NUREG 0660). ~
Minutes NRC/CPCo (6/13/80) - Mr. Cook, af ter acknowledging Mattson's comments, continue 3 to explain the factors involved in increased cost projections. He emphasized the large overhead factor - a direct consequence of delays - and explained that the end date in Forecast 6 was not the result of a detailed analysis, but rather the result of the need to choose an end date for cost projections. Cook went on to explain detailed schedule analyses which had been under-taken af ter Forecast 6, including a scope analysis of long lead-time items and a bulk analysis. A third scheduling path, that of licensing, was also examined. Cook stated that the scope analysis shows favorable lead times relative to an 11/83 target date in areas which received specific attention. Further, the schedule as a whole evidences a good chance of improvement into the sum =er of 1983. The s bulk analysis identified a bottleneck in the auxiliary buildirt. Nevertheless, it was felt that this analysis also promises a good chance of improvement over an 11/83 target date. Cook stated that detailed job schedules would be avail-able by the end of July or in August. With regard to licensing, Cook mentioned that the analysis indicates that licensing is presently on the critical path. Following Cook's lead, Mr. Sullivan introduced documentary inf ormation which demonstrated licensing as being critical path. The licensing schedule produced by Sullivan was generated by working backwards from an 11/83 construc-tion target date. Licensing intervals were based on Consumers Power Company's best expert judg=ent and represented an amalgam of judgments from attorneys and project leaders. The schedule suppcrted Consumers Power Company's con-clusion that licensing became critical path in May of 1981. Mr. Tedesco took mild issue with some of Consumers Power Company's licensing intervals, noting specifically that the four months for ACRS review could run parallel with other activities. Sullivan argued that the dropping of a few months from the schedule would not change the basic need for immediate NRC action. Mr. Olmstead, an NRC staff lawyer, admitted that Consumers Power Company had apparent conservatis=s in its schedule. Olmstead thought that the one year allotted for a hearing was unrealistically short, supporting the thrust of Consumers Power Company's argument. In response, Tedesco voiced the opinion that licensing could be expedited if necessary, and he further asserted that the NRC would make full use of prior re-views so as not to have to re-do pre-moratorium work. Tedesco instructed Daryl Hood to establish a review plan and to work on a list of open items relating to the Midland project. Tedesco stated that such a battle plan would reduce uncertainties in the review process. However, Tedesco indicated that at the present time the NRC could not put Midland at high priority except with respect to the soils issue.
2 9 Minutes NRC/CPCo (6/13/80) Mr. Keeley then addressed the soils question, giving a brief overview of historical events, ending with Consumers response to the December,1979 Show Cause Order. In response to inquiries from Consumers Power Company, Mr. Hood indicated that no staff SER on soils would be issued prior to the pre-hearing conference. Mr. Miller pointed out that most of the issues for the SER were clearly identified and need not depend on the pre-hearing conference for de-finition. Miller stated that licensing would lag at least 6 months from ACRS review. Since the fix would take 24 months, Mr. Howell stated that the SER must be issued by this summer to prevent start-up delays. Consumers Power Company also voiced the hope that the NRC would, in the future, avoid in-convenience and delay similar to that caused when jurisdiction of the soils issue was shifted from the region to Washington. Mr. Sullivan then addressed the question of B & W sensitivity. Hood stated that a letter had been sent regarding Consumers Power Company's pro-posed fix in this respect. However, preliminary indications were that the letter would be inconclusive as to the adequacy of the proposed solution. Sullivan ended his presentation by pointing out certain recent NRC publica-tions which had erroneously placed Midland at an unrealistically high position on lists of stations with respect to surrounding population densities or popu-lation growth rates. Sullivan specifically mentioned the ACRS letter on ATWS as an example of an incorrect pl& cement of Midland in comparison with other reactor sites. With regard to this problem, Mr. Schwencer suggested that the parties arrange a conference call with Mr. Grimes of the NRC to apprise Grimes of Consumers Power Company's objections. Mr. Cook then ended his part of the presentation with a brief review of Midland project reorganization, further evidencing Consumers Power Company's renewed commitment to a prompt completion of the Midland plant. Schwencer ended the meeting with a review of NRC action items on Midland. In an earlier exchange Schwencer had premised to schedule a date for a visit to the site by the caseload forecast panel. He repeated this commitment at the end of meeting as an action item. Other NRC action items mentioned by Schwencer include: (1) the Grimes phone call to be arranged, (2) DES dates on Midland to be shortly issued, (3) review plan to be established, (4) a letter to be sent to CPCo on the anchor bolts question, and (5) another meeting on Midland scheduling to be held within the next three to four weeks. The meeting was adjourned at approximately 12:00 o' clock A.M. Issued by James E. Brunner Attorney for Consumers Power Company CC: SSHowell, P26-336B DMBudzik, P14-617 JWCook, P14-113 JLBacon, M-1085A GSKeeley, P14-40SB MIMiller, (Isham, Lincoln & Beale) TJSullivan, P24-624
= m g i I ) hye., y)'W: Q <*i I g i t 6 g i cw a a ' i r) N '() F t ,ij '+ ,'r 'r ,r) 9,ly t b ,e, ,9 ....... p hi + t i ;, r.1. n n
- 9 G
>,,ts) i ..t nft fn 6 t \\ ', y.I . + + */ t - t 's 1 fC , r.' NRC Panel to check 'scheduD ' ^- > 'W f-
- esCa,' ' Ar
) 1 3, n s;h, e,, g, (,,.4, v 3* ) '6,,, e /. (,. i m, p a r - wAU +, .w, ,,a, g,.7 g a c '. m n. c, r, x n, >4.,n ir. .>v s .o1 .n n, ,. m soar. ce-r y nc rc. i., i n m r a. w..,,. o p o m,a m,,,n o,., ,.g ,,s ,.,3 g ri " m ' u r,- ) e i <1 4 i I e t I i r r s n,3, g.,,g (,.g 7h gg, u ' f r ft, ' } {(.s, j s std 4 <( -1 41 \\ it - e i. ! t.- a g, g,, g,,, g,,a h n h t v. me m # c h nie r time hd rnight b. i*, .ve' .i, .o .f. ,,s .Jc a i y - ,,.9 'r As u 3 ,.gq, prii'
- h5 %g'd N *lpF8 i
s r ws 4
- ,,r
, i cr.. h,,s a, ,n g.. s g., ,,3,.f b e.h" r. d 8 ra 4 . i, 'h.' c!'. n .r.* . g .p {) f 4 .q y,j l, 9 $ [,,,y g,g y w, q q s o
- ,. 2
[b ..e at, r o
- p i:
,,if,.,3 3,,,,,;y e N
- d e: We the
- 1 i i, o
e-r n i,, 1,,,f.hc,p.,, e. n,. M. e c,. p., M 6 is s-r ,t .t ,q 4re s e. ,g r 6 a e, s.t i, M F i. * ,,reog s e m.n 3
- j,,, a ;,u,,,g,
% i,, g, mqg ~ I f. i.* s +',e iNi x i r"s a w. u ,,4y j p,, ..f a er f a tha s a r nua N Ar ,t.. it. i s. ..i-,, r ..a 4 'i,5.. incy --tin th a t i n (tm)'r e tay mg the g i i: i. 'ri. t'.
- ribi
- p.. r..n
,,, }l. st, h,1 s t,. a r* > I M i a < N c o t. 4hi.h has hl C staff, m i ded td r.f art t he j es ic w r de N in; ' a :t c ad y,,3a unab!E WtJf a'yp'i naa t .;y< r!- i.* ..f-i,4 wa* ,', w (o a, .. d si - d ' [ ',t, t ur,e.u m[ s'.rra m. thp8tCedn "t6rir fu<d Ilid dM ra a#J '. 4
- e p,.
+,. W no . con % s d 's! c, ..t th4 '/.tbf f a nd phof.tehty.si pt,'prytract* In es at!/.r( ff 't h .p tMn We* L1hft' o tec ga.a ric. m ' va ; t..u i n. ~ p,.mhlv.Hwing Da4/ Mut mit thy hearing attudly p i ,..a e mt a in. no .o ese ers .s . w n. , e e s,cw rr.m th.." to f o,- m.d; a s so on e ole y raq. : aone io.um i v an w e to n. s. rf the l 'a r. M Je h bind.o. L-f 'J. a t i hor t a., s brnro;4. ceu u n.c r W> t h a t,'.'. 1 h.d s et. Of,you' go pi'i> dst ...ai) ,is. ,, +, u.. s . o h vne L. ens:ng r d, mf it N on.or n on t. ~ e t he n n m a$ hiaor v. rd hee to an> wet it probably o, oe mor. .a ec , a,c e t, ~ ~ M n.w .w u fm.n,m.-
- u. ~.., - f..w-r-..w n
,,, ~ o. m gs,,ri<. n.'y, cf,the hn'or d.of inter s, nrh4ln M id, h>ok at the typical !cngth,"pttbebt sbt , pa s* oew^ o W rw have h -f nu. of no.., lana ei not m um n. v.4e i "m~ns 8 c,"uxh.W( (ontedthin mw m se ;., z.o, s y of ..n. n ah anwmem ana on navenn,a r to get on w eb the U vnsm r of M d.c,1 Hv la w c erzens af fe h d by ro 'ra r lb .iid Consumer s if c.w"a s..-na m e m t hrir a r c i < o,r ary u< rn+, wty hw egr%r%e% a o. punt .ro c,,,,,a n e t ,, a. arod sa. L not the af,. uny s c.., .a... f. am~ w-mum om moanumo e-nmmpc 4. m ar s.. m m a -,m.ar m, ing asuso:c.y e(,hry . ~ m.- - r i mally i.n' rnd4 it et c th in any,t onstri,r tion sc h ,s ed, esi ur c r u. ' t h es , ' b r i t, y s t e rn adh i !). ;,in g der nin - r A o i % e IP iw ' h.e t the g o i >>-. f r.a s t h!s, but flutcd MgdlandiQl uht plants 41M br ti e t. aa,d I a l.: he 6?rng by %F ffV I V 'c' t P'tPfA n e 'l < 'MI I O 'On I unt d it mpes up In prh abt ..ni 6- 'fuM 4. r sing
- h. N bra;th wid be af fn ved by a n ai ie wad a4, itr'o mq ( e rr ; cf mn t, f or (n.c..:t.i s*
r'r r,- fu, ,3 I he o' Wr y Fas ofwn i r w e.st om.n I,1 p ant s 3 4y.** *' l v1 we ha.*fr ont,of, Media nM@'sqv W is t to accomodaf ra .3 ...a. r ,st +v ,o
- ss a
..n s..s t, m a t e t,3 P., M ', lic tud rs eral other pt.nts in Art aig i< ..~e
- 1ot<
, rn, or t r ac t. u for the fur t her a h "g th an M n* a nd ha s e a b ig. ,ter s ent inn p r of e s it.. a y ing pers..n% ' f'e r e's it p r obte rn atj_ a fh'd', g rjor eper al[f'g }c.e, el , t as id NUc. but i b =.d m h u se, th46,s y rd e m trg umm. r ssa r sly pla nt. ra+ r p r mr1* y.Oh :he Ihat of C w n. una b.e to rn o M,a'a nd on,. p, tor;; r;ie 'rar iu !Se lir. hirl cu l : m a t e, ^ a n y, pia nt,our tfg, under, wnstrug dera y nu, !ca r ; dant r 'r ~ -. e ; e.1 o.cr s, o n ma t mt 1.- ht
- n. a t,e rea ty
', i f.od n.a te *
- s c r.i t
.Au,s,51. n, I h M
- r. a real med r ather than % pc
- ht m.t Ne a:L + rd u s u a l r*
> T - i.r
- 6. M.s 4 w r.
s c r a! 0,, .he ,n. a ..a y 4 u + ..t c. s . _... _ _. ~ _
- u d
,e a, < gMb. m9..%.., r pu.,,w 3 ,y gs,
- c.. n lj 1.'
6 ' n.. c- ..: m. m : .,g. , + &y.).;.yJ:h l,Q q. . ' '; y. 7 ), fT gg
- )y.
l
- ._ y gy..
- .-& n.usy; n U.- o
,M -;.: e.c.N:s s {i.s.y.!.- l ~t khQ-.h..j- ;4:,k*t_h.v.- w..g my. e g: .?.;: w m_f,j'. ~ Y
- I.,
e _d- ; .q e-gec,m*grR w'$ y,t p w 3 f 2:.i j%..y ;.u:pQ. : J$ d g
- e s.
- n} cap' \\%g, f '1 -W -- 4 . t: g, '.f . ::dd:Ti('i y, ~;, .g;,. i' Efi[ * $sd ' 'l T i ^ _"e gg;t. n. a.x 1. 4 ?m't e. 2.* *., 'w: y ....-N.
- f*
r- ~@ g ~ J. te.
- s:'
.;.~ .~ h. e ~. me yq w-i.. (h. ~ "L 9g: q 4 , 3, s, a.- am 4 -w.g r m., k h*3.,t.l:}g. - L e ~
- ~ ',
t ofy
- 4. 7.(
y.
- .a,....
s f 4j.- e l si ,,4 q. 2'
- ,fe.
}, 4, u. i.'.' Ag g4 ).,,. l u v -l g is ;;. Y '.{ Y t .A. s ~ 4.h'M '5 . Y. i..
- s ss q-
~ %. ':ch.: r s,'-:_l' 'N - cA-p --l;-- 5 p; :f i., :. ';.,, - .,)_ .CC ,\\ fiy.. +:[*]R \\ f.v[.' -l[Q y +..,n.;t,' M( c. .. ~ '5 f. fh * 'i. e.5, * *. '.; n-- ' ]nw,g:g". < } .g (.'.g J ;7,x,,.. m g s.. =..;y _n. f ',*e fl, ~ k ,mam,,,, - -.x g,.R Q. >- 4, a . m, a.-. m.:...... ,.s'z:y u, s <; n g ' g_A e gh $. 3, *. C.' 's ' + -+ %gy%mfu$$~ &@mm, - M$sY g w. d i 2 wn, <-ry s. .). ' ^ Y A ul M.) ' 4., k_;,&4V i ge ri&h *;a - s e** .h.,.; w a. c 7 -h../, j'5 *h Cgl q $2' j o v,.: y 'y* f< y; Q'*s h;;p <>p ? o n-w g e .g M j Z J ( e $ @o 7 y 5 3 2 r>W 7f i, s >: 4 a 2 %...,.C, S. ~%.$,r 44 o-- a j Lg 4 Jg ',J. m o r, sp,gm..+
- y... -
_y. a- % - ? w"-e ^}}