ML20080D771
| ML20080D771 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 05000000, Susquehanna |
| Issue date: | 05/26/1983 |
| From: | NRC |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML082380886 | List:
|
| References | |
| FOIA-83-498 NUDOCS 8402090224 | |
| Download: ML20080D771 (1) | |
Text
-
l l 'l l
a %.._.. %.4
_j
._---_._l-~.L-.-
l I
k f
I i
I
(
i
._L
_t__J~
1.
L. _.._ _ L -[-
L__ _. -.
-L._--
t---
4 o
<0 g
3 t
~
~
-~.
I.
.e i.
l e
e t
8 i
5 i
s
...... _ _.. ~ -.. -
4-~-...
4 l
l l
I 4_.
I
._.4_.....d_.
4-.,
}
{_
i i
T
_l--
-o----
i t
i
.._..__._-._r;__.__.L_.-_
. J _. L._...
. ---+
r l
I i
I I
I
,i_ i _._ _ _,.
e l
I I
1 e
-4~
- + - -
l l
I l
1 A
I f
- ~
l j
q
,_.. _ _ _ - _... _ _....L _ [_._ L_ L _.
. _ _. t.
._L_
. 1_... L_
_}__.._-__-
a._ L' l.
g
)
- __2.. -_2. _ u.-
__.2 a_
___ 4 _ _, __. _ n
__a__
.y y__
E l
l
}
I h
l j
I
.__j _._ s_]
1.!
i 4
i i
i i
I t
i i
i I
..___._J
.le i i
4 l
l l
l M.,- L3,1(_(1
+
.J 'h l
l t
Th, i l
l l
i l
l l
i
- n. i, "r i.
i i
i i
_i i
i.
i i
H i
- x.i
-g.
~ _N._._.
l
.I _.i_ _l I
! _l fI l
I _l l
l
,I l
l fl l
E 4
3 l
6 l
d i
t
$ _ h _ ;6y I
i
[
l' l
l I'
i f
M l
l I
l l
l l
l I.
i l
l l
t i
I.
l l
l I
I I--
l I
l l
l l
l 1
l l
l l
I I
l l
l l
-__g
. _' _! I__. _.! _ !...!,I l
I i
l I
_.i i
i l
i i.
i
.._.I l
I l
I!!
i
, 4 i y l
l l
l m--. _. _ _... a. _. _. a. - t f
3 _..--
- ._ _-.f. _ =-. - ; __.x z.-.
{
I l
I
~
-I i
l l
4l o l
i l
t l e
l l
M Q,
m o-p I.
t
_ia e.
e t
c l
T I e*
, r 'f I
l' t'
N < tIl N M i
9._ _;1 1
J I
i 1
t ow<
_ A _.
e l
O* O m t
i M
OLZ
?
w
}
l.
iI i
9 uosz l
I l
eco a c.se 1
I l
I l
I l
l i
l i
r r
i u
n m
e e
o o
i b
6 50 b
%,.9 fQ d
N l
~
6 I
i t
i f
l I
]' !
f I
_1'
a t
/pn asuus, g UNITED STATES i
- j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g
WASHING TON, D. C. 20555
^b
/
- g s..
j APR 17 7980 Docket Hos. 50-387/388 APPLICANT:
Pennsylvania Power and Light Company FACILITY:
Susquehanna Steam Electric Station, Units 1 and 2
SUBJECT:
SUMMARY
OF MARCH 20-21, 1980 CASE LOAD FORECAST PANEL MEETING AND SITE VISIT The last Caseload Forecast Panel Assessment in May 1979 projected a fuel load date for Unit 1 of March 1981. During a meeting with us on January 29, 1980, the applicant indicated that they had revised their fuel load date from December 1980 to April 15, 1981.
On March 20-21, 1980 the Caseload Forecast Panel again visited the site to update the Panels projected fuel load date.
The meeting agenda (Enclosure 1) and the list of attendees (Enclosures 2 and 3) are enclosed.
The applicant indicated that the plant was 77% complete. However, for the first time, such things as contingency allowances for undefined work (i.e.,
TMI impacts) were taken into consideration.
The 77% complete figure, which includes contingency allowances, would correspond to approximately 84% when figured without the contingency allowance.
The applicant indicated that their current schedule included only the impact of the short terms lessons learned.
However, they noted that for the first time they have incorporated a contingency allowance between fuel load and commercial operation.
Other TMI impacts are included in the contingency.
The applicant also for the first time incorporated detail engineering schedules down to the task level into the construction schedule. As of January 1980, about 83% of the engineering work for both Units 1 and 2 was completed.
At the present t'me, the applicant is about 2 months behind the current schedule (April 15,1981).
With the incorporated contingency, the applicant indicated the fuel load date could slip to November 1981 and still not delay the desired commercial operation date.
The applicant indic0ted they_ are about 1/3 the way through their startup and l
testing program.
About 12% of the plant is within the 2 week walk down phase-,
i that is the inspection that is made 2 weeks before turn over for testing.
j' Within the next two weeks all systems necessary to support reactor vessel-and l
primary system hydro testing will be turned over for testing.
The applicant'
~
Ii expects the hydro testing to be initiated about the end of August or the l
begirining of September.
l l
.m b
1'*\\
N l
7
,T-y yy
,s t
9=
w y
-r
?-v-y
/,
.s/ APR 1,1980 As of March 10,1980, about 98% of the large pipe and 94% of the small pipes were installed.
About 94% of the cable trays and 90% of the conduct are installed.
The applicant expressed a concern that licensing activity progress may not be timely to even support a projected fourth quarter of 1981 fuel load date.
He indicated that not many round 2 questions had been received.
Conclusions The applicant is currently about 2 months behind the Unit 1 April 1981 fuel load date. The applicant indicated that because of the contingency allowance between the fuel load date and commercial operation the fuel load date could slip to November 1981 without impacting the current Unit 1 commercial operation date.
Based on the status of construction and preoperational testing at this time we projected a 9ecember 1981 fuel load date for Unit 1.
Our date does not include potential TMI impacts.
yj,
)n r >*M Sydney Miner,' Project Manager Light Water Reactors Branch No. 3 Division of Project Management
Enclosures:
As Stated cc w/ enclosures:
See next page l
e l
- ~ _..
?
.?
s l
[pn ascoq
[ h m [%h NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION UNITED STATES E
WASHING TO N, D. C. 20555 5.;*. %
.j g=:
t
% ".... /
AUG 161979 Docket Nos: 50-387 50-388 4
APPLICANT:
Pennsylvania Power and Light Company FACILITY:
Susquehanna Steam Electric Station, Units 1 & 2
SUBJECT:
SUMMARY
OF THE MAY 15-16, 1979 CASE LOAD FORECAST PANEL MEETING AND SITE TRIP The PP&L initial fuel load date for Unit I was May 1980.
In May 1978 the Case Load Forecast Panel visited the Susquehanna site and based on the status of construction and the preoperational test program projected a December 1980 fuel load date for Unit No.1.
Our Susquehanna review 1
schedule was based on the December 1980 fuel load date. After the Case load Forecast Panel's site visit a meeting was held with PP&L management. Dur-ing the meeting PP&L acknowledged that they were behind schedule but stated that they were committing additional resources to recover the lost time and requested that we reconsider our review schedule. We agreed to review the schedule following an update by the Case Load Forecast Panel after trans-
. mittal of the first request for additional information (Q-l's) to PP&L and a schedule was supplied by PP&L for providing the required responses. On May 15-16,1979 the Case Load Forecast Panel again visited the site, to up-date the Panel's projected fuel load date. The meeting agenda (Enclosure 1) and the list of attendees (Enclosures 2 and 3) are enclosed.
The applicant outlined steps taken to improve construction progress since the May 1978 Case Load Forecast Panel site visit. The PP&L management was restructured to a project organization to focus attention on Susquehanna.
The construction contract was re-negotiated to an incentive type contract.
Additional manpower.was added. As a result bulk installation rates were-reported to have increased substantially.
For example, 280,000 lineal feet of cable were reported as being installed per month. To facilitate systems turnover, construction control and scheduling has been re-oriented from area control to a system control basis.
-- 7 9aG.,/ e w_
- f""l(.3
_(
g.:
. AUG Au G79 PP&L estimates that their percentage completion for Unit 1 is 84%, which is approximately 20% greater than in May 1978. The engineering and design activities are approximately 83% complete.
The applicant stated t'at the preparation of the preeperational and acceptance test procedures are underway. All the NSSS test procedures and two-thirds of the BOP test procedures have been prepared and are in the review chain. The startup transfonner was energized in July 1978 and the applicant estimates that it will take about 77 weeks from this date to com-plete the preoperational and acceptance tests. The applicant indicated that their pre-op test program was about 5 weeks behind schedule. The applicant included in his schedule for pre-op and acceptance test, items we normally consider end of construction. The preoperational test has not been coni-pleted on any system. We indicated that we thought that his pre-op and acceptance test schedule was optimistic.
Conclusions The applicant still thinks he will be ready to load fuel in May 1980.
However, based on the status of construction and the preoperational testing at this time we concluded that our previously projected December 1980 fuel load date may be optimistic and that a fuel load date in the first quarter of 1981 was, more realistic. The Panel will again update its projected fuel load date in Ja' Jary 1980.
e ff
/)A, @
' Sydney Miner, Project Manager Light Water Reactors, Branch #3 Division of Project Management
Enclosures:
1.
Meeting Agenda 2.
List of Attendees (May 15, 1979) 3.
List of Attendees (May 16, 1979) cc: See next page
.