ML20138H573
| ML20138H573 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | South Texas  |
| Issue date: | 08/03/1985 |
| From: | Thrash C AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED |
| To: | AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED |
| References | |
| OL-I-CCANP-108, NUDOCS 8510290084 | |
| Download: ML20138H573 (9) | |
Text
db SOUTH TEXAS PROJEC'1 Minutes of the Management Committee February 19, 1981
" i, ;2
~, _
Cattlemen's Motel m
1:30 p.m.
i$EeeCi : 5 AU 43 The following members of the Management Comm il 5:45 p.m.
and alternates were present from 1:30 p.m. untHotel in Bay Cityj on Thursday, February 19, at the Cattlemen s
';:d'; wg G 3' '~'
La t:(
For Austin, Messrs. Hancock and Muehlenbeck (Chairman) and For San Antonio, Messru. Poston von Rosenberg For CPL, Messrs. Borchelt and Range For HL&P, Messrs. Oprea and Galdberg.
for Austin, Mr. Pokorny; for San Antonio, Ford and Messrs. Hardt and McWhirter; for CPL, Messrs. Moore, Also present were:
Basile; for HL&P, Mr. Beeth.
h The sign-in sheet for those in attendance at t eThe agenda for bot Exhibit No. 2.
meeting is attached as Exhibit No. 1. February 19 and Feb i
the start of the meeting that (at which the CEOs Mr. Goldberg reported HL&P will take charge of the March 20 meetingrather than following the will be in attendance),of having the contractor make the principal repo t
his Mr. Barker distributed copies of the agenda forMr. Barker first e (attached as Exhibit No. 3).
d under the new the status of percent completes, as calculate (which include i
the report procedure additional work presently foreseen). percents complete d with those at the end of December, as follows:
To the end of To the end of January December component 53.3*
53.4 l
Unit 1 Power Block 58.8 l
60.6
. Unit 1 and Common 20.2 23.3 Unit 2 Power Block 43.2 45.5 Total
- See Exhibit 8 for detail.
ih Mr. Briskin reported that the reforecast plan wh c June 1, has been geared up anticipates a preliminary report byd the risk to be refined, after all supporting detail an 8510290084 850003ADOCK0500pg}B 0000 PDR CC Mu( +{of x
O e
bh
~>~;';3
/' ~
6
' h d/
b
- '#+,sp** '/
q 6
p
' f
, /~, '#'
I g,$.s'**'
have been completed, by September.
Mr. Hancock emphasized the importance of the assumptions, with respect to overtime and
(
multiple shift work, that will go into the revised schedule and budget.
Mr. Barker next discussed personnel changes in the contractor's organization.
He reported that Mr. Leasburg had left last Friday to take a job with Virginia Electric and Power Company and had been replaced, on an interim basis, by Mr. Carl Crane CHr. Crane had been the first project construction manager -
for the South Texas Project).
Mr. Barker also reported on the departure of Mr. Jack Herrington, scheduled for mid-March.
Mr.
Barker expressed the view that both had been key people and that their loss would be felt by the Project.
i With respect to complex concrete, Mr. Barker reported that the Project was exactly on schedule, having poured 269 cubic yards in January and 249 thus far in February.
With respect to welding, Mr. Barker reported that the Project had 158 qualified welders, on both repair and new work, with 13 taking training during the day and another 80 in training after work.
Mr. Oprea inquired when Mr. Barker felt there would be a complete release by the NRC for concrete and RSMEiwelding, to which Mr.'. Barker. replied about two months.
Mr.
Goldberg felt that a full release on concrete work might not come until early May.
Mr. Goldberg next began a discussion of HL&P's review l
of Brown & Root's engineering.
Mr. Goldberg explained that the review, being done by Nuclear Services Corporation, is scheduled for completion during the third week in March, with a final report due during the second week in April.
Mr. Goldberg commented on the turnover which Brown &
I l
Root continues to experience among its technical personnel.
He reported that Brown & Root lost 80 technical people, out of approximately 800 involved in engineering and design, and hired the same number during January.
I Mr. Barker reported briefly on preparations being made for the May operating license hearings and Mr. Oprea reported on the just completed interviews which NRC representatives had had with HL&P representatives regarding operating capability.
Mr.
Oprea reported that the NRC representatives felt the hearing on I.
the operating license would likely begin May 11.
Mr. Barker reported on the current status of "show cause" commitments that HL&P had made to the NRC last year.
Mr.
Barker reported that 166 out of the total of 276 had been closed 4445
= = - - -
=
_3 l
out and'another 44 were awaiting decisions by the NRC.
With
(
respect to the other 66, Mr. Barker reported that work on them was on schedule.
Mr. Barker commented, with respect to the residual 66, that many will continue for the life of the Project.
Mr. Barker deferred a detailed discussion of the " major problems" section of his agenda because all will be addressed in detail at the Friday morning meeting.
Mr. Barker concluded his report at 3:50 p.m., at which time the Management Committee took a short recess.
Shortly after 4:00 p.m. Mr. Poston called the meeting back to order and began the nuclear fuel items.
With respect to the Chevron Amendment No. 2 (the same as Exhibit No. 8 attached to the minutes of the January 22, 1981 meeting of the Management Committee and attached hereto as Exhibit No. 4), the Management Committee unanimously approved the amendment.
At 4:10 Messrs. Hardt and McWhirter began a report on the current status of the Chevron deliveries and reported the following statistics to date:
1 l
1.
Pounds U O delivered in forty lots through
'g 3g February 19, 1981:
1,426,663.9 lbs.
2.
Dollars spent to date on the forty lots, including the applicable $5/lb. prepayment:
$70.057 million.
3.
Average price per pound:
$50.17/lb.
4.
Dollars owed on the forty lots, due about July 1981, for " final price" adjustment:
$1.524 million.
Mr. Hardt emphasized the need for the Management i
Committee to proceed to establish the nuclear fuel accounting methods required under Section 9.3.7 of the Participation Agree-ment.
The Management Committee discussed the fact that the Accounting Committee had on occasion taken this matter up but had never come forward with a definitive recommendation.
The Management Committee requested that the Finance Committee under-take this task without delay.
Mr. Range reported that the Finance j
Committee is scheduled to meet on March 5 and would like to have 1
Messrs. Hardt and McWhirter join the meeting.
l i
Mr. Hardt also requested that the Legal Committee again t
consider the question of what would be involved, legally, if the participants should decide to sell some of the uranium on hand or 4446
4-i the uranium contract rights which.they now possess.
Mr. Hardt was' concerned with the question of what lengths of time would
(-
be-required to obtain the necessary approvals for sale in each of the participant organizations, assuming a decision to sell had previously been made by all of the participants.
Mr. Hardt next passed out Exhibit No. 5 and discussed the ramifications of the proposals diagramed on figures 1 through 4 (and as further explained on Exhibit No. 6).
The Management Committee requested that San Antonio and the Nuclear Fuel Commititee continue to research this matter.
i i
At 5:07 Mr. McWhirter distributed a tabulation of the decisions required, with respect to nuclear fuel, from the Management Committee.
This tabulation is attached as Exhibit i
No. 7.
The Management Committee approved the proposed actions set out on the February line of the tabulation.
At 5:45 p.m. the Management Committee meeting was adjourned.
A copy of Mr. Oprea's letter of February 16, 1981, transmitting a preliminary statement of costs through January 31, 1981, is attached as Exhibit No. 9.
Prepared this 23rd day of Febpsary,1981.
f Charles G. Thrash, Jr.,
retary 1
\\,' s
.i \\
't s
O 4447 i
a r A
,m_,
_.,_.,.._,__..,4.
SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT Minutes of the Management Committee February 20, 1981 Plant Site 9:00 a.m.
The following members of the Management Committee and alternates were present from 9:00 a.m. until 2:00 p.m.
on Friday, February 20, at the Plant Site:
For Austin, Messrs. Hancock and Muehlenbeck For San Antonio, Messrs. Poston (Chairman) and von Rosenberg For CPL, Messrs. Bor chelt and Range For HL&P, Messrs. Oprea and Goldberg.
Also present were:
for Austin, Mr. Pokorny; for San Antonio, Messrs. Spruce and Hardt; for CPL, Messrs. Essile, Moore and Read; for HL&P, Messrs. Jordan and Beeth.
The sign-in roster of those in attendance at the meeting is attached as Exhibit No. 1.
Mr. Barker's agenda for the meeting is attached as Exhibit No.
2.
Mr. Barker pro-ceeded to display Exhibits 3, 4 and 5 as slides and dealt with some of the " major activities" items listed on Exhibit 5 as follows:
r 1.
He explained the departures of Messrs. Leasburg and Harrington and the interim appointment of Mr. Carl Crane as construction site taanager.
2.
He reported that the concrete restart was on schedule.
3.
With respect to the welding, Mr. Barker reported that the staffing was adequate.
4.
The 1981 work plan is being prepared.
5.
The reforecast plan is targeted for preliminary numbers in June with finalization in September.
6.
With respect to engineering review, Mr. Barker reported that a need had existed for an independent review of Brown & Root engineering and that the Nuclear Services 4
Corporation had been retained.
The review is to be com-pleted in April.
7.
The operating license hearings were reported as scheduled for early May, probably to begin on May 11.
Mr.
Oprea explained the operating capability audit of HL&P which NRC representatives had just completed.
Mr. Oprea 4475
reported that HL&P now has about 100 operating personnel on board (out of the approximately 350 that will ulti-mately be required to operate two units).
At 9:48 Mr. Barker proceeded to his Exhibit No.
6,
" Major Problems",and reported with respect to them as follows:
1.
Manpower control and planning has been improved with a new reporting system which requires that changes in manning levels depend on the detailed work plan.
2.
Pipe hangers, supports and restraints are presently delaying construction but the contractor is developing a plan to better coordinate engineering, coating, embeds, etc.
3.
Conduit separation.
The Project is presently analyzing available alternatives of re-routing, con-structing barriers or other methods to achieve the new required separations.
4.
Soil structure interraction.
The controversy continues with NRC representatives, who are trying to require re-design to change a design which the NRC pre-viously' approved.
Mr. Barker reported that if the Project were forced to use the NRC's new method it would have a major impact on the schedule for the Project.
Mr. Barker reported that this study should be complete in May.
5.
With respect to engineering plan-design assurance and control, Mr. Barker reported that an effort is being made to end design changes as soon as possible and to assure proper procedures with respect to all essential changes prior thereto.
6.
The cable tray support problem stems from improper application of the standards and inadequate design verifi-cations.
The 40-week analysis program is approximately four weeks old.
7.
The American Bridge problem results from the vendor having failed to meet welding specifications.
Meetings have been held with the vendor and some reso-lution of the repair problem should be achieved within a few weeks.
8.
The Hilti-Bolt problem results from the testing program not having been run in accordance with specifi-cations.
The re-testing program is now going satisfactorily.
9.
Painting and coating.
A study is underway to see if the specifications can be made less severe in order i
to reduce some of the surface preparations presently 4476
required.
Late NRC guidance in this area, following TMI, has exacerbated the problem.
10.
HVAC.
This work has been slow getting started but Bahnsen now appears to be working well.
Mr. Barker concluded by stating that the Project's objective in 1981 will be to get better sequencing, and there-fore more efficient, utilization of effort.
Mr. Jordan inquired whether the ten " major problems" had been listed in order of priority.
Mr. Barker replied that 1
there was no priority among them, all being major problems.
At 10:08 Mr. Guerts began his report with a slide showing construction progress on Unit 1 and Common (a copy is attached as Exhibit No. 7).
Mr. Guerts explained that a drop in percent completion at the beginning of January (from 60.6 to 58.2) had resulted in part from revised unit productivity rates.
Mr. Guerts reported that there is potential slippage resulting principally from the conduit spacing problems which, until they can be resolved, will permit very little conduit work to be done.
Mr. Guerts was optimistic about overcoming delay in the situations involving cable tray supports and pipe hangers, noting that Brown & Root has brought in Pete Boscola from their Comanche Peak job to manage hangers and supports, so that one man will be in charge of engineering, procurement and i
construction schedules for such work.
Mr. Guerts next displayed a slide showing construction progress on Unit 2 (Exhibit No. 8), observing that he still anticipated 10% potential progress in 1981, provided engineered locations of embedments and cavity ventilation problems could be solved quickly.
Mr. Guerts next displayed a slide showing overall construction progress (attached as Exhibit No. 9) and a construc-tion Project management manhour analysis as of January 31, 1981 (attached as Exhibit No. 10).
l Mr. Guerts next displayed a slide entitled " January Status" (a copy is attached as Exhibit No. 11).
Mr. Feehan inquired whether " intermediate schedule" as shown thereon is the same as the " work plan" previously described, to which Mr.
Guerts replied in the affirmatits.
Mr. Guerts explained that the engineering effort is presencly limiting the construction i
effort.
An extended discussion followed at this point concerning the difficulty involved in making definitive schedule and budget projections at this time with the many engineering analysis and repair projects in progress.
At 11:00 Mr. Ken Cook began his report on engineering, first reporting on the American Bridge problem.
Mr. Cook re-ported that the inspection of the steel on the site, not yet
. Od7*7
_4_
erected, had produced 232 nonconformance reports but that no repairs had been ordered so far.
The repairs will await a statistical evaluation which will be made in the hope of lowering the acceptance criteria, a process that will take approximately 28 weeks, beginning next week.
Mr. Cook reported that the Hilti-Bolt testing should be completed April 20 on schedule.
Mr. Cook thereupon presented slides, copies of which are attached hereto as Exhibits 12 through 17 and which are largely self-explanatory.
At 11:12 Mr. Cook completed his report and Mr. Guerts advised that it would also complete the contractor's report.
Mr. Barker asked if any of the Brown & Root repre-sentatives had any questions about his report but there was none.
The itinerary for the site tour (attached as Exhibit No. 18) was distributed and the' Management Committee recessed for lunch.
Following lunch the Management Committee was taken on a site tour, conducted by Mr. McIntyre, until 2:00 p.m.
Prepared this 23rd day of February, 1981.
I p_ _
7 Charles G. Thrash,Jr.,gpg"retary 4478
.. -