ML20080D277

Trip Rept of 830622-24 Caseload Forecast Panel Site Visit Re Plant Status Review.Projected Fuel Load Date Comparisons Listed

ML20080D277
Person / Time
Site:	05000000, Palo Verde
Issue date:	10/31/1983
From:	Knighton G Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Novak T Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Shared Package
ML082380886	List: ML20079E005 ML20079E130 ML20079F108 ML20079F306 ML20080D196 ML20080D205 ML20080D208 ML20080D255 ML20080D263 ML20080D277 ML20080D286 ML20080D297 ML20080D306 ML20080D318 ML20080D331 ML20080D335 ML20080D339 ML20080D343 ML20080D346 ML20080D362 ML20080D368 ML20080D375 ML20080D379 ML20080D381 ML20080D392 ML20080D409 ML20080D413 ML20080D416 ML20080D422 ML20080D425 ML20080D432 ML20080D465 ML20080D469 ML20080D480 ML20080D491 ML20080D497 ML20080D514 ML20080D546 ML20080D558 ML20080D570 ML20080D582 ML20080D590 ML20080D596 ML20080D608 ML20080D618 ML20080D631 ML20080D638 ML20080D641 ML20080D651 ML20080D656 ... further results
References
FOIA-83-498 NUDOCS 8402090070
Download: ML20080D277 (2)

Text

-_

' t'

/#* ** *%(o UNITED sT ATEs g

)

E[. }*p.. g n NUCLE AR REGUL ATORY COMMISSION 6

. J WA5mNr.mN, D C **DWe

\\,.m.k]i NOTE T0: Thomas M. Novak, Assistant Director for Licensing, DL THRU:

George W. Knighton, Chief Licensing Branch No. 3, DL FROM:

E. A. Licitra, Project Manager Licensing Branch No. 3, DL

SUBJECT:

RESULTS OF PALO VERDE CASELOAD FORECAST PANEL VISIT On June 22-24, 1983, the Caseload Forecast Panel (Licitra, Lovelace and Hartfield) visited the Palo Verde site to review plant status.

The previous Panel visit to Palo Verde was made in March 1982. A comparison of the projected fuel load dates resulting from these visits is shown below.

March 1982 Visit June 1983 Visit Appl.

Staff Appl.

Staff Date Date Date Date Palo Verde 1 11/82 11/83 11/83 (verbal) 4-6/84 Palo Verde 2 11/83 11/84 8/84 4-6/85 Palo Verde 3 11/85 11/85 1/86 4-6/86 For Unit 1, startup testing didn't begin until June 1982. Currently (6/83) about 80% of the subsystems have been turned over for testing, 40% of the tests have been completed and only 5% of the test results have been reviewed. Assuming no major problems with the remaining tests, the panel projects fuel load by the second quarter of 1984. Although the applicant verbally informed us of the 11/83 date, the actual published date by APS is 6/83. The Panel's date is more than 6 months later than the applicant's published date. So far, the applicant has not agreed to formally revise the 8/83 date.

For Unit 2, startup testing probably won't start until the end of 1983.

To date (6/83) only 11% of the subsystems have been turned over for testing.

The Panel projects fuel load by the second quarter of 1985, provided that startup testing begins by the end of 1983 and a testing rate of 6-7% per month can be maintained.

The Panel's date is more than 6 months later than the applicant's date of 8/84.

For Unit 3, the Panel projects that fuel load will be one year later than Unit 2, i.e., Unit 3 fuel load by the secorid quarter of 1986. The Panel's date is less than 6 months later than the applicant's date of 1/86.

8402090070 831031

[SE 83-498 PDR

P T. M. Novak As a result of the above findings, the Panel's dates for the first 2 Units are more than 6 months later than the applicant's dates.

Therefore, based on current NRR policy, a management meeting between the applicant and the staff is warrented to resolve the significant differences between the projected fuel load dates. The applicant has not been made aware of the Panel's findings.

We request your approval to verbally inform the applicant of the results and to arrange a management meeting to resolve the differences between the Panel's and applicant's dates.

E. A. Licitra, Project Manager Licensing Branch No. 3 Division of Licensing ue N

4 64 i