ML20115A836
Text
._. _. _.
I r:
i i
l.
PUBLIC SERVICE.
i INDIANA April 5, 1979
^
S. W. Shields -
vice President.
E ngineering 5
.{
Mr. Jerry N. Wilson U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20555
Subject:
Harble Hill Units 1 & 2 Review of LWA Impact on Project
Dear Mr. Wilson:
This is in confirmation of our job site discussion on February 27, 1979, regarding our comments on what the limited work authorizations meant to our project effort and schedule. Our reply was that although we did not achieve the full seven plus months of elapsed time from the issuance of LWA-1 to the issuance of CP, we approximated five plus months of our overall critical schedule program.
Since our LWA-1, Amendments and LWA-2 were issued at intervals, weather.was a reason why this was not closer to the seven plus months. If our start point had been in Hay or June, instead i
of late August, we could have realized almost the full seven plus months in our schedule.
)
Putting it another way, if we had received an LWA-1 and LWA-2 at the same f
time, we could have avoided much of the effect of bad weather by performing
]
parallel activities permitted under the two different LWA's..
You asked as to our percent complete at issuance of CF and that calculates to about 1.6%.
1 t
We view the work activities permitted under our LWA's to have been very t
appropriate in our case.
(1) It would have been useful to have been able i
to have brought up the interior columns from Elev. 330 to 346 in the auxiliary building along with the slabs and walls which lined the rock and then built the entire Elev. 346 slab on. rock and out across these piers.
(2) The need for LWA permission to store material caused us confusion and lost time and in some cases, caused dollar penalties. Hopefully, owners are advised of this and can obtain permission as a part of the issuance of the' original LWA.
(3) Where rock excavation is minimal, the turbine room foundation certainly should be permitted as a part of the LWA work.
(4) I believe there may be g41g5840606 KILLEFE84-367 PDM
r
/~O Jerry N. Wilson April 5, 1979 Review of LWA Impact on Project PUSUC SERVICE INDIANA i
a trend to less excavation placing foundations at higher elevation and g
the general rule addressing permissable LWA-2' type work should address this and possibly permit certain above grade and/or interior work.
Please advise if clarification or other discussions are needed. I would i~
only repeat in closing that without the LWA program, our project would have had an even more serious schedule impact than we already had experienced, which had forced us into a commitment to build another fossil unit, and would have been at considerable cost to the consumer.
o Sincerely, O fl e
kT V. Q wD L. A. Crews Director-Nuclear Project j
IAC jus cc S. W. Shields i
l i
i i
e 4
- e.
'~
.