ML20147D672
| ML20147D672 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Comanche Peak  |
| Issue date: | 01/12/1988 |
| From: | Ellis J Citizens Association for Sound Energy |
| To: | |
| References | |
| CON-#188-5353 OL, NUDOCS 8801200255 | |
| Download: ML20147D672 (18) | |
Text
rJ53
,I DOCKETE0 1/12/MSNRC UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
'88 JM 19 N0:31 BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSINO ROARD.gygg y,ggg( o v DOCKEiWG A 8 W f.
In the Matter of
}{
Uh @
}{
TEXAS UTILITIES ELECTRIC
}{
Docket Nos. 50-445-OL COMPANY, et al.
}{
and 50-446-OL (Comanche Peak Steam Electric
}{
Station, Units and 2)
}{
(Application for an i
}{
Operating License)
}{
CASE'S PROGRESS REPORT Pursuant to the Board's June 6, 1986 Memorandum and Order (Progress Report and Notice of Available Documenti), CASE submits its progress report d/.
The Board is already fully aware of two important developments which occured recently; we therefore will not go into great detail but mention them here:
(1) the Board's 11/18/87 Memorandum and Order (Litigation Schedula) was issued (following various pleadings by the parties and the Novenber 2-3 prehearing conference); and (2) the upholding of the Board's admission cf Amended Contention 2 in the Construction Permit proceedings (which became final on 10/6/87 after having been appealed to the Appeal Board and the Commission).
[1/ This filing includes both CASE's eighth and ninth Progress Reports, due to a variety of reasons, and we apologize if this has resulted in any inconvenience to the Board or parties.
The Board and parties were, however, made aware of progress which CASE had made as of the time of Applicants' 10/30/87 Eighth Progress Report through discussion in some detail during the November 2 and 3, 1987, prehearing conference.
I 8801200255 000112 ADOCK 050 g 5 PDR cb_d o
l l
l Two meetings took place last month which we believe are of special interest and potential significance. One was the December 9, 1937, meeting between Applicants and the NRC Staff (see 12/9/87 neeting transcript; see also attached December 10, 1987, DALLAS MORNING NEWS article "Conditions listed for U.S. approval for Comanche Peak reinspection" and December 10 1987, FORT WORTH STAR-TELEGRAM article "NRC seeks underlying causes of Comanche Peak problems").
The other meeting was the December 17 and 18, 1937, meeting between Applicants and CASE; CASE witness Jack Doyle met with personnel of Applicants and their consultants regarding the piping and pipe supports, cable trayr and cable tray supports, and other areas of design /2/. The meeting on Thursday afternoon and all day Frida, was followed by a plant tour the next day (Saturday). CASE believes both the meeting and the tour were informative and helpful, and we look forward to additional future such meetings.
(See 12/17/87 and 12/18/87 Applicar.ts/ CASE meeting transcripts.)
There are two other relevant matters in which CASE is interested and regarding which we will be seeking additional information. At the present
/2/ Only about half of the cable tray / cable tray support issues were covered at this meeting, and Applicants and CASE plan to continue discussion of those issues at another meeting in the near future. As we made clear at the meeting, there may be future additional comments and/or or questions which we will have regarding those issues already discussed and/or yet to be discussed. We believe that many of these can be handled on an informal basis, although we may also want to pursue some matters through the discovery process.
Incidentally, CASE was struck by the quote at the end of the attached 12/4/87 DALLAS MORNING NEWS article "Building shortcuts tied to fallen bridge," because it exemplifies the reason for CASE witness Jack Doyle's concerns about the importance of considering the cumulative effects of problems; and we are including this article for the Board's information.
2
time, all we have are newspaper articles about these matters, so we are attaching them hereto for the Board's information.
One is a filing made by Texas Utilities, apparently in late November, with the Securities and Exchange Commission advising that Texas Utilities expects that Conanche Peak will not begin operating before late summer 1989 and that Texas Utilities will announce a revised cost estimate for the plant in early 1988. According to public statements by the principal financial officer of Texas Utilities Company (the parent company of TU Electric), the former early 1989 target date is "no longer achievable" based on the Board's licensing schedule and "on TU Electric's current schedule for the completion of reports that will trigger the licensing schedule." (See attached December 2,1987, FORT WORTH STAR-TELEGRAM and DALLAS MORNING NEWS articles.)
Another significant development is the reported settlement by TU Electric with Gibbs & Hill, the original architect / engineer for Comanche Peak, for $25 million.
(See attached articles: December 19, 1987, DALLAS MORNING NEWS; December 19, 1987, FORT WORTH STAR-TELEGRAM; and December 21, 1987 WALL STREET JOURNAL.)
In regard to the difficulties CASE is having in attempting to obtain discovery from the NRC Staff regarding trending and other information relevant to these proceedings (see core detailed discussion at pages ?
through 4 of our seventh Progress Report), the five F01A civil suits filed by GAP are carrently in progress in various stages.
Ms. Garde will be filing additional more detailed information regarding this in the near future. We still expect to have additional questions of the NRC Staff.
3
4 With further reference to the Section 210 Department of Labor (DOL) case on behalf of S.!!.A. Hasan (see more detailed discursion at pages 4 and 5 of our seventh Progress Report), the Administrative law Judge ruled adversely to Mr. Hasan, and the case is currently under appeal before the Secretary of Labor.
It should be noted, however, that in any event, we believe the record of that DOL case contains information which is relevant and important to these proceedings, regardless of the final decision. CASE will keep the Board inf ormed regarding this matter, and again urges that the Board order Applicants to furnish the Board and parties with copies of the transcript, depositions, all exhibits, ano Applicants' post-trial brief and proposed fi'. dings of fact.
CASE is also continuing its analyses of other documents received recently (for example: many of those listed by Applicants in their Progress Reports and Annotated Bibliographies; many boxes of deficiency paper; Results Reports; Project Status Reports and back-up documents; Results Report VII.c; and the Collective Evaluation Report; NRC Staff Inspection Reports and audits; etc.).
On October 14 through 16, 1987, CASE took the depositions of several of Applicants' personnel. We have also been reading, reviewing, and analyzing the many thousands of pages we have received recently (and as we previously predicted, we have now been deluged with documents, some of which we believe we should have been supplied long ago).
CASE has, however, been able to cut down considerably on necessary discovery requests because of Applicants' various Answers to the Board's 14 Questions and because Applicants have made many documents available informally, which we do appreciate and which will help to expedite the mammoth job CASE has before it.
However, we still expect it to be necessary for us to file some 4
additional discovery requests. We consider this absolutely essential for CASE to be able to make informed decisions and to be able to adequately prepare our case. CASE is also awaiting additional information from the minority owners which is to be turned over February 1, 1988 (see 12/22/87 Response of Texas Municipal Power Agency to Consolidated Intervenors' Motion I
to Compel TMPA to Supply Complete Answers (9/15/87) (CPA)) to determine if additional steps need to be taken regarding outstanding discovery requests e
to the minority owners.
In addition, there are also still some other discovery requests regarding which Motions to Compel by CASE are in abeyance awaiting results of further informal discussions between CASE and Applicants /3,/.
CASE is currently reviewing these requests in light of recent events and information received.
In the past, Applicants' and CASE's joint efforts had appeared to be f ruitful in many areas, and we had mutually agreed on further extensions of time so that these efforts could continue; we will attempt to work these out informally and we will continue to keep the Board advised in this regard.
As discussed in our 9/14/87 Progress Report, there has been some delay recently in CASE's receiving communications reports from Cygna, and we are not certain when these will be up-to-date.
In addition, Cygna advised in a
/ 3,/ As has been indicated previously, it is the understanding of both CASE and Applicants that, in cases of agreement on enlargtments of time, the Board does not require that any action be taken by it, but rather is satisfied with notice of the agreement.
5
~
[
f f
December 15, 1987, letter 84056.134 to CASE's Mrs. Ellis that it was transmitting the Pipe Support Review issues List (RIL) - Rev. 4 (dated 9/17/87) to CASE, which had not been previously sent at the appropriate time because Mrs. Ellis's name was inadvertently left off the "cc list".due to a typographical error /4/. We obtained from the Applicants at the Decenber 17-18, 1967, Applicants / CASE meeting a copy of the September 18, 1937, Cygna i
letter 84056.120 (the original cover letter for RIL Rev. 4), which is referenced in several instances throughout the Project Status Report for Large Bore Piping and Supports.
CASE believes that the following will be of special interest to the Board (cost, if not all, of which we do not believe the Board has yet-and the last two of which CASE also does not have):
12/9/87 Applicants /NRC Staff meeting transcript t
12/17/87 and 12/18/87 Applicants / CASE meeting transcripts and attachments Cygna Pipe Support Review issues List - Rev. 4 (dated 9/17/87)
Cygna Pipe Stress Review issues List - Rev. 4 (dated 9/16/87)
L November 1957 filing by TU Electric with the Securities and Exchange Comnission and any other relevant details Details regarding the reported settlement by TU Electric with Gibbs &
Hill jj,/ CASE did receive a copy of the Pipe Stress Review Issues List - Rev. 4 in September when it was sent out (although Cygna's 12/15/87 letter indicated that their records showed that we had not received it, we did receive it at the appropriate time, although we were not shown on the "cc list" for it either). CASE recommends both the Pipe Support Review Issues List - Rev. 4 and the Pipe Stress Review Issues List - Rev. 4 i
for the Board's review.
1 t
i 6
l
i I
l i
Pespectfully submitted,
$//> s: 5 f //t
's.~Juanita Ellis, P'resloent CASE (Citizens Association for Sound Energy) 1426 S. Polk Dallas, Texas 75224 214/946-9446 Co-Representative for CASE Attachments:
December 10,19S7, DALLAS MORNING NEWS article, "Conditions listed f or U.S. approval of Comanche Peek reinspection" December 10, 1987, FORT WORTH STAR-TELEGRAM article, "NRC seeks underlying causes of Comanche Peak problems" December 2, 1987. FORT WORTH STAR-TELEGRAM article, "Nuclear plant report shows same problems" December 2,1937, DALLAS MOR!;ING NEWS article, "Comanche Peak start-up delayed another 6 months; Licensing hearings expected to push on-line date back to late '89" December 19, 1937 DALLAS MORNING NEWS article, "N-plant design dispute settled" December 19, 1987, FORT WORTH STAR-TELEGRAM article, "Comanche Peak settlement costs company $25 million" December 21, 1987, WALL STREET JOURNAL article, "Dravo Corp. Is Selling All Operations Except Its Natural Resources Business; Texas Utilities Settles" December 4, 1937, DALLAS MORNING KEWS article, "Building shortcuts tied to fallen bridge" 7
C
~30 A chrfinansliterseusPrhd Thursday, Decetnber to,1957 Conditions listed for U.S. approval of Comanche Peak reinspecti6n fw Comancte Peak.
lenents of the plant to comment en get it."
AnNRCinspectionof theplantin taucaraoes because the fGC'wants Cy Dar. l Real u
3,,,3,,,,,,,,,re, a, his lut of prepmed condmons ne said ne most defacant conds. i9se found safety problems at C. answers to ibe some of the same
- 8
- statsry to durument what parts of the within two weeks con set by the KRC is the case'by-manche Peak and the utility asked questions we dat especiauy about The US Nuclear Regulatory Com-plant wiu not be reinspnied, and John Beck.RJ Dectric vice pres 6-case dwamentation about those that heensing bearings be sus theromcauses; Jars Chssand"But
-= sia!! lasted setra condAtaons why dent fw muclear engineerang, sand parts of the plant that do act need to pended in earfy 1951 Wednesday that TU Dectrac must the twoweek deadlane andscates that be reinspected I!e said an examanas
.we're also concerned that the NRC's rush to Judgment w12 not give as meet befcee the federal agency will e e co@ed our rnaew of C***8CM I y" '
the federal atency as ready to ey taas of the caisses of what went suffacsent tame and iniwnstaos to approva the utahry's *get well" ress-their prcCram hyttons to the is. PNM d NbW esalaate the plan and make to prove the reinspectaos plan, which svang at Comanche Pesk sluays has s
plan fwComanche Prat extent that we'se adentified som E
would be a significant s!cp la the been scheduled for the final rep *8
"'*8 A53 Iormed.inteU1 gent soggesucat*
h of the seven cMuons cans shortcomings that we want them to E7- **
8 plant's battle to gain an operating h-of the reinspection plan, hm M* Peak as being bonit for the unlaty to evaluate the root DU am." Grams ud *We're ready to cense.
- To do that (root cause reesew).
about 73 anales southwest of Ma canne of the problems at the nacicar cWe that ik programs are ac-
"I think we've very close - but you have to understand what hap-but that two wwks as 500 near G3ea Rose in Wrve11 plant and to present a list of lessons ceptable proended they do these pr
,,.re not playing barsesbors," BMk pened ta the past, and we A and County. A new schedale and cost es-learned during its reinspection, sa6d emer things" saad. "I'd rather have gorien as a? we're g.itng to talk about it" Beck tannate tw the 575 billaan plaaf is en-Chris Grimes bead of the NRC staff Granaes asked the stility and op proval outright today but we didn1 sand
- 1 thank there were some posauve gected early next year.
- 7
Ntiot.1. Pa.cc N / Tnd % enn St= Tele; rxn / Tnursday.W., T-ember 10. Im T NRC seeks underlying causes 6fComanche PeakproXems BY Gou REols but Cn istopher Gnmes i*e:te' of ne:sury te det==ne th: rm:
a wnu u.wru in: NRCs Ceman:n: Feai :r.specu=
cour of ea:n s:ecin: probitm. Tnat DC.6 - Nucier Regulator) efiort said tnat probaNy w on t be swn cuestion is to be adressed in T1Js Comtrussion omaah said >csterday enwgh 0nal teron on its correcut: actions thev wsnt to know th: una:rlyin; rea.
TU Dectrichasin eficcireekedth: prcyant sons for extensive prob!:ms in tre de. ori;inal architect enpneenn; firm on "I think we'r Foing to need it sip of Co:r.anch: Peak nadear power the pro.i:ct. Gibbs & Hill in:. altnough sooner. Gnmes sali "1i cuts acre:.s all the change has never tren made 06-tne other repens ton tne progress of p, ant,
%ithout that knowied;:. 'om:ials cial carrecuve wori at the plantl" saliiney can't property Jud;; w::ther Gri'nas and oth:r NRC omeials met Th: NRC ne:ds to know what o:igi.
TU Emric's multimillion-dollar yesterday with utihty omeifs and na! rmstakes were made in the plant's rework and re.inspecuan prcyam is plant opponenu to tell TU omdds d:sig, h: said, so it can determin:
sumeient to cam an opeming license wtat else wiu be requred for the agency what needs to be done to present their for the 57.7 billion.plus pro):ct 45 to axept their "fidit' olan.
recurrence.
miles sauthw:st of Fon % ar.n.
Grimes gave TU omdts two weeks Tb:lesing opponent of Comanche The answer to the NRCs question to respond to the agency's rem ests for Peak said yesterday h:r grouphas Nen basiedly involves laying bhze for de.
aditional information on several as-asking the sam: question for a long pp faitures that ha$e help-d put the pects of the reinspectien and rework tim:.
piant eine years behind seneduit. It's progmn.
-g menmurrdth NRCiswanting an answer that TV, mayon:) eq:r of Grimes said th: NRC sta:Thopes to seme of this information." said J uanita the t's.t.has put ofTpvmgr;.M:n fx have its fing evduation of the program Diis. pt:sid:nt of th: Dallas based C41 rnany montnt completed by in end of the year-i: ens Assa:iatien for Sound Energ),
The problemsbeing addr:ssed t > the when TU Ele:tri: put trS:ther th: wh::h is an it.tenenor in Comanche r: sort program,indud: inadequades rework program at Coman:ne Peak in Peak lie r. sing p ceeedm;s.
in the plant's piping and f te prote: tion 1964.the utihty said it would sear:h for But she is ecmerned that the NRC and its electrical. h eating and air-condi-the rcot causes" of construction and may be trying ie move too fast in trying tioning systems, The NRC bcensing desip probi:ms, as well as fixing w hat toreview the massive rework prcpam.
hurd deahng with Coman:he Puk al.
it found in addition, th: utility said it
,W tha. y in November stepped a.
so has found what it calls a "historic 9 would consider the broader impli:a-bs:k once apin from theirlatest pre-breakdown"in the quahty controlpm-tions of those problems - in other danions of when Gm:he M cess at the proj:ct, calhng into qu:stion words, whether problems found in one would begin pmdudng electridry and the valiity of records deMmg with area of the plantmtsht point to prob-how much a wW cost.
rnany parts of the pmject lems in oth:t areas.
John Beck,TVs uccutive vi:e pres-Hoarvar, the extent of d: sign prob.
Instead of beginrung operation in ident for nud:ar cepn:ering, said the lems found at Comanche Peak led TV carly 1959.TV sali the plant wiu not qu:stions of' root caus:s" of prob! ms to expar.d its renew to indude a cem-open befo : late :ummer 1939. New will be answered in a repon due out piete re. anal., sis of the plant's des:pt cost projections will be ar.ioun:rd ear-dunng the first quaner of nnt 3:ar.
W ofiidals then said it was no longer ly next year.
FORT WORTH STAR-TELEGRAM December 2, 1987
'l i
9 p r.4
.T1
+
' l a t. w,Q p.4cu Q).4 c.:.n h F.
i s
n
'l*b w J
[ g u. QV73 ODQ
_G'/vv a
7 O Q Ti)w.w.O~ w?l,Q u >,.w) &.n A
W x-
/2o 47 BY Gou RLos se w u 3.wn.
ih: needle is sta:k spin and the
~
COmanch~e",""-
sam: chi song is being play d at th:
Co=ms, a maa. - pue Tne con is poing hi;h:r and rno:t de.
/ From orevious pace lap are capected.
r Texas Udlides of:i:iah,in a docu.
rework ana reinsx:uon pro;nm attne Tnelicensingborf:aimninr: tis:
rr.:nt fil:d hs w:ek with th: fed =a) phnt.
judps said in a.S ember croer inat k:untis and Exiang Commissic!r%
Th: hering now are eye:ted to they bel: eve TU D:etri: will hast a said thev wiD ar toun:e a redsed mst hinin v.il or May before the Aton. hard time commeing them t'.st in e stimatifor tr.: ;tm:in ext y 1988.7b:
i: Lifet) :nd Licensing Board. To: piant can be op rated safd).Tne bord board wiu re:o nmerid to the Nu; lear sr.id it wiD assum: there w2s a hinanta!
p'ast nowis bud;:ted at 57.7 billion, or about 10 tims its onginal pri:e tar.
Rephtory Commission whether Co. breakdown in etal:ty control at the Th:dxum:n thoini:stedthatthe manche f tak should receive an opera. punt. and that old records of the piant's proj:n. already cine yers khind its ting li:en.t. The hearing are expected d: sip and mnstrusion therefore nU to last fr:tn six rnonths to more than a b: looked at skepticaDy.
c-ignal s6:dul:. will fad as mu:h as six months furthe behini Texas Utilj.
year.
A utility anaint whh t:: Stas.ief ties Vix Pr:sident T.L Baku told th:
The ecst increase ard delay an. and Poor's Corp. bond rating firts u f noun: n:nts were ewected. TU Dec. 3 :nerday that, by itself, th: annx...
fed:ral agn:y that th: plant is not ex.
p cted to begin op-rating before lat:
tne Ye Pruid:nt John Beck in &p. rn:st of further delan ard pn : e.
summ:r 19S9.compred with th: corn, tember : icted the cost would nse c :ases forComan:r.: Peak won't:ar:
pany'slast pred2:6en of early 19!9.
past in: 57.7 billion mark and sr.id it Tetas Utiliti:s' bend ratirgs to Mc Texas Utilities is th: parent compa.
w2s dcubtful the cariy 1939 deadhne At the same ume, howestr. arwnt could be met.
Thomas Mxkler noted. If the he:.r.
ny of7U D:ctrie, which is building the
. problem.plapu d plant near Glen Ror.:,
TU Eecine's rework and reinspec. iep take a bng time and if substa-tuJ about 45 mil:s' southwest of Fo:t ti a pagam at Comanche Peak origi. cost es:alations become apparent.
- naDy wasdue tobecompletedinMud wiu & looking closely
- to see wheths Worth.
Th: furth:r dday and cost inx:$s:
IDI-4.
the bord radr.g should (: lowr:1 wiD put more pressure on Te.xas Utili.
ti:s' bond ratings The buc utihty's ratirgs have faDen in recent years du:
to the vast coit and :.ajor unxrtainti:s ab:r.n Coman6e Peak. Lower bond rating inaease th: utihty's costs of
- borrowing money a pmNem for both suaholders and rat.psyers.
Baker told th: iederal s.:curiti:s com.
mission the newest dday is due to the recently announced 56:dah forlixm.
it:5 hearig:s on the plant, and on RJ E:ctne'sowewhedul forreponingon th: resuhs of its muhimiborsiobar (bre on 00\\LGCHE on text page),
A
__w.
_~m.
-A
+
w e
.A i
1 18 A Egrestiasjuiera.a js, Wednesday. December 2.1987 H-2 Comanche Peak start up delayed another 6 months t
DsaDnil R"1 Licensing hearings expected to push on-line date back to late '89
"n""e *n'n*g,e's"*m*
h dd t ne start d cour.or.ere:at opera.
eae taan for Comancte Peak Las sLppeJ.y p.,rM out a deny sn the pre-T!* Datric in Nrvem ber 194 summanes docraer. tag a thre baskling the nuclear facility about for the cospletaos of reports that 3 ear reingection of C,,:st.zcte by at least saa more months-untJ uous esumste of early 19s9 A new T1e Secuntaes and Enhange 3 males southwest of Da!!as, near wall tngger the hcensing schedu.a.
Ivak that began atser a spe-: al SRC sometsme after it.e summer of the cons and schedule estimate as ex. Commissaan was anformed that the Glen Rose sa $omerve11 County.
ifeartogs are errected to ste revaew team sound andratacna (i
-to allow name for luensing bear gatedearly next year Ramsey said early two target was *no longer Baker's letter, whach was made abent fave sonths after the US Ko-safety problems an 3%4. The utthty Assuming that interest costs for sags, utahty ofixtals sam 3 Tuew1aF, achievable
- in a Iceter signed late last month by Tom Baker. principal pubtec Tuesday, said the delay was clear Regulatory Commissma staff asked that the plant sacrease by 530 malhon the beanngs be sus-TU Dectric spokesman Duk each month. Ibe delay ws!! a&f at financial offuer of Tesas Utshtnes based as the lacensing schedule saurs a formal review of a stah'y pended an January 1981 l
Ramsey said theannouncement did least SIso msIlson more to tie C59 Co the parent company of TU Dec-anJ IJccasing Board on No adopted by the US Atomic Safety rebts ce its retaspectsan of large-he utthey as scheduled to re-not set a new operating date but NIbon cost estimate announced by inc, The Dallas. based corporosion as en TU Dectric's current schedule revie l
..~ -..-
C Blant design bg clispute settled m
3 By David Real Eieetne on non. nuclear projects.
b 5*fWm" Comanche Peak's cost has al.
k The designer cf the $7.5 bilhon most doubled from an estimate of Clp Cemanche Feak nuclest plant will $189 billion in 1984, when TV g,
pay 5:5 million to the owners of Electric f1ntsbed the first unit cf j
g tne troubled pro;e:t as settlement the twin reactor complex and be-f:r potentis! cistms stern =tng pan its corrective a:tton pro-
[
from the facihty's eng:neer:ng grams.
o and design. TU Electric efftetsis hitchse! D. Spence president of ra
y? * ' -%
5 announced Friday, the utthty s generating division, t/t Gtbbs & Hill Inc. cf New Yerk, said in a statement Friday that tL.
2 the crtginst ar.Thatect: engineer terms of the settlement are the O
for Ccmanche Peak, was replaced most favorable that could be ob-C i fermally this year after safety tsined.
k Q
problems forced a mulumillion.
"TU ElectMe had the option of dollst redesign and reinspecuon filing a lawsuit if a settlement had g
y not been reached," Spence said.
y progrs=.
r l
Gibbs & Hill efftetals could not *llowever, protracted lingauon 1
be reached for comment Friday. would simply deplete the limited The announcement was released resources Gibbs & Hill has, and in Dallas after the close of busa. would create large legal expenses ness tn Sew York.
for the Comanche Peak owners.
The terms of the settlement Therefore, we believe this settle.
j
- r n1 es11 ier the owners of Co=anche ment provides more than could be Peak to receive 525 million in recovered af ter the litigation.
i r
essh, ceferred psy=ents end fu.
TU Electr:c spokesmac Dick I
ture engineering services to be Rs=sey said be c:d not Irnow how
{
provided by G.bbs & 11111 to TU Please see N PL. ANT on Page 53A.
q M'
j i
i 5 N p_ ant designer to pa, $25 milion Continued from Page 33 A.
Power would receive $125 m:11 ton discuss ste:1!:c prerlers Fnd:v.
l&4 ra uch of the settlement was fer its 6: percent shste. Ers:cs tut :n 0:teber utthty r:rott ststc;
}L deferred er would be ;:1d in ser-Electne would receive 59.t0 000 for ttst "The rect c:use et these cest;n
,a 1:es However. TU E;ectne will its 3 9 percent and Tex La would Treblems is ceter:ntned to de
- A r;ht the overall value cf the settle-receive (542.000 fer its :1 percent.
wesknesses in the G&H (Gbts b I
ment proportic::stely,in essh, with Lenctme Co=snche Peak cppc-Hill) dest;n process sud a !stlere 13 y
'ne three other owners cf C:msn. nent David Belt:. a memoer et the comply wt a certain c:ntrcl rt-f.If cne Pesk - Texas Mun:c:rst Fower De,ll:s-based Cat;: ens Arsec:stion outreme nts# stipuwted by te:er:.
Acency, Brs:os Electne Power C>
for Saund Energy. said he was re;ulstlens and indust v s'andsids j#
cperottve Inc. and Tex.la Electne surpnsed by the announcement.
Comanche Peak is ietng but!!
Cooperative cf Texas Inc.
"We ve always elleced the de sten crout 75 miles southwest cf Ds!!ss
{ ~d TU Electric. whi:h owns almest was de!:ctent, and th:s seems to put near Gle n Rese in Semerve:1
-i
?*
percent of the plant, would TU Eleetne s st:mp cf approvst en County. A new ccst c.nd senedule es-E Teceive soout 3:2 miluen in essn out sp;r:tss!." he tsid i: mate fcr the plant wt!! tv :n-
.ud serv:ces Texas htut:ctra.
TU Ele:tt:c effic:c..s de:!:ned te neancea c ar!v next yest
)4
)
FORT WORTH STAR-TELEGRW Satruday, December 19, 1937 l
Comanche Peak settlement costscompan' $25 million BY G uu RI.OU etensh e er;ineerin; and desip prob. illion-dol:ar pnvgrarn of reiruTcctions ter~
and trwork at Coman2 P:2k near TU ' nri: m.erday anncun:ed it D: sip pmN:ms at the olant hav: Glen Ros:. about 45 miirs souinwest of h: wit::aior50f mir.tenits'Totemif ken ated repeatedj by TU cmnals Fon Worth. TU E.=tne is trying to y
cir:* a:.unst tn: arcrutecural and and feJer2 regulators Axording to a bring the plant into cornp:ian:e with engn=nng firm whos: flawed wori r oen prepared last 3:ar for on: of the federal standards and convince federa!
con:nn.ed to massive overruns, de. smaher utihties. Gibbs & HiD was re.
nud:ar omeids tnat tne plant can be lan :nc rework at th: 57.7 binion Co-szed b:cause it laried ereibihty operated safelv, mrch: Peak nuacar power plant.
snh th: % dear R ;.datory Ccmma.
Th: plant is nine years befund sched.
Cf.cifs of TU Dxtri: maionts stor. h=ause engneenn; pron:ms td: and will cost at least 10 tim:s its w= men cuensh: man tm tad ong.
on W rna q owner of th: plant. said the fdin' of'a s
su:t 2:a:nst Gibbs & Elihad been con-Inally antianated. TU om:ials last year TU omeifs said cariirr this month hd but nW.
espanded th: destp ponton of tnett that the latest proJxted op: rating dat:
corrective work pro;: ram to encompass for th: plant. carly 19S9.cannot be met.
G bbs & HiU was replaced as d: sip, a 100 percent *redesip
- They also said the piant would be de-er an1 e gineer of th: plant Ir.st year, Announcement of tne settlement was "v d at least anotrer sis months. A e
ahnough TU omeials say the company made near th: close of workang hours new cost esumate i t tn: p! ant wiu be had completed most ofits work. Other > : nerds). Gibos & Hill representatives announced carty n:u y:ar. tney saal f.rms w;r: brou;ht in to re-do all engi. etdd not ti: rea:hed for comment.
Utihtyspoiesman Dek Rarnsev sair neenng work at the plant and sobe TU Dectri:is conducung a rnultim.
(More on COM.GCHE to Tage Ot
. Saturday. Ikemkr 19,19R / Fcrt Werth Star.Telegrme / Sxtion 1. Pace.3 COmanC3e / From Pace 21i that ifTU D:ctric is considenng a suit Agency-w rtinfomedthatthen go.
or conducting neptianons toward a usuons w:re gotag on.
settlement with sen ral contra: tor Those utiht:s w2nt out of Com$n.
Brown & Root or any otner Coman6: ch: Peak, whid is now much more Peak contra: tors. h is not aware ofit. expensive than when they bought irgo H: said he was inforn'ed of the negotia.
it. The sm2 Der pow:r comparu:s and tionswith Gibbs & HiDorJyrecently.
TU Dectri;have suedone anotheros-r hficha:1 Spence, presidst of TU the plant, with TU aDepng brea:h c.f Dxtric's generating division, said contra:t and the other utilities aDepng lengthy litiption "would simply de.
fraud and mismanagement of the p1ete the limited resources Gibbs & HiD projxt by TU.
has and would create larp lep) es.
A new round of hearings ecdd st$1 penses for Ceman:he Peak own::s n:tt spring before the federal Atomi:
"Therefore, we beheve this settle. Safety and Uxnsing Board, rossibly rnent presides more than could be re. leading to an opera.tng license for th:
covered after the litipdon,"
plant.
The $25 rrullion setdement, to be TU spokesman Ramsey said that shared with the smaner utihties that whil: 325 million may be smaD in core.
own a total of about a 12 pertent int::. rurison to bilhons of dollars in cost est in the plant, wiD be paid in cash, overruns, "it's tb: mast favoraNe set.
deferred paynents and "future engi. t):m:nt we're corninxd we ctdd ret.'
'neenng seni:ts -.. on non.nud:ar Ramsey said the drision to axept proj: cts,* a:tording to TU Dectne's th: setuement was nct affxted by a news release, d: sire to avoid furth:r, possiNy unfa.
Ramsey said the snuDer vtilities - soraN: pubheity for the plant, or to Braus Dectric Power Co-orerstne asoid amng in coun the qu suons that in: Tea-la D:stri: Cro;erative of har been raised about TU's mana;e-Teus and Teus Murueral Power ment of the pre; ct.
t
~
Dravo Corp. Is Selling Alloperations Except Its Natural Resources Business
/ L I 2 o I ? *)
theless, some said they expect the inoves By Rick Wannw.
to Unnt quick financial rebel to Dravo.
4:aff nemerser of Tus % m.htawr Jovam, PITTSBURGH - Dravo CorTu, whose considenne the market nich, that the nat-ural resources group has estab!tshed ior it-name has been synonymous with major en.
self. The group sells a proprtetary time-gtneenng and construction projects for stone compound used to scrub stacks of nearly a century,is sclhng aH tts opera.
bons except for the prohtable natural re.
co;l fired power plants, To butster tnat bustness as well as help sources business.
The company estimated that the re-sales of industnal limestone to the' steel structunng, coupled with other facters.
and chemical 'ndustnes. Dravo also an-wt!! result in a fourth-quaner charge cf 100 nounced that it plans to acquire a Ken-milhon to D0 muhots.
tucky hmestone quarry and Astribuuon la-After that. Dravo-which posted an op-cthtles in Tennessee and Lotustana from erating loss for the first nine rnontns of Cyprus Minera!s Co.
1957-said it hopes to return to the black.
There have been outside pressures, too, buoyed by sales of limestone. The com-In July Dravo fell into technical default pany's natural resources group had pretax with several of its creditors. New agree-proht of ut.S mttbon lut year, ments hage teen negotiated.
Wilbarn G. Roth, chairman and presi-1.ut month, an investor group led by dent, said a signihcantly leaner company -
New Jersey attorney Attriur Goldterg said nonual revenue is expected to f di to about it had tought a 6.5% stake in Dravo and g275 mulion from 1700 milha-will tm-was louaing to acquire a "strniheant eq-prove shareholder value, utty interest." One analyst said the chance "Being more focused will allow us to of a hostile takeover battle could have get the returns up." he said.
"nudged the restructunng along."
But analysts, some of whom were sur-pnsed at the scope of the Dravo announce-Roma Gt'cmiu tw Nsw Yoax ment, had mixed feelmgs.
roN'nostfru tu tslts Arneta "Sure,it wiu make them more sound, less volatile and their earnmgs more pre-dictable," Gregory M. Drahuschak of TcIas Utilitics 8cttles Butcher & Singer Inc., said. "But I thought DALLAS-Texas Utilitics Co. said its the engineenng had potential. You learn Teaas Uuhtles Electric Co. unit signed an from your mistakes, not throw away the agreement with Gibbs & 11111 Inc., setthng bustness."
all potential claims the utthly may have Mr. Roth, however, sajd Dravo no with the engtocenng company concerning longer has a competitive advantage in en.
the engmeenng and destgn work on its Ce ytneenng. He cited its recent haancial dif, manche Peak nuclear plant.
hen!Ues from designing and managing Under the agreement, Gibbs & 11111, a waste tortnergy recychng plants.
New York based unit of Dravo Corp., wiu "I rea!!y thmt we had the right strat.
pay Texas Utthties 81.d the other owters of egy," he said. "But the execuuon was the nuclear plant g25 milhon in cash, de-por,a ferred payrnents and future engineenng Under terms of the restructuring, dis.
5efYlce3-closed by Mr. Roth Fnday to employees in Teaas UtH!!]es said it signed the agree-Pittsburgh and to fmancial analysts in ment to avoid "extended !!Ugation" that New York, the company will shed the six "would deplete the hmited resources of busmesses that make up its engtneeun; Gibbs & lilli and would create large legal and construcuon group.
expenses for the Comanche Peak owners."
Jacobs Engineering Group Inc., Pass.
dena, Calif., wiu buy four of them: Gibbs Tne utility sajd the setuement was larger than the owTiers could expect to gain from
& HillInc., a New York based unit; Dravo a lawsult against the engineenng concern.
Engineenng Cos., which operatas from No lawsuit has teen filed against Gibbs &
Pittsburgh and Adantal Pittsburgh-based Hill regardarig Comanche Peak, Dravo Constructors tnc.; and W eyher/ tJr.
Othetals cf the engineering concern sey Constructors Inc., Atlanta. Terms couldn't be reached for comrnent.
weren't disclosed.
The nuclear project has been fraught Dravo Energy Resources Inc. and Dravo Faci!!ues Managernent, the units e.
with problems since construeuon tegan in 1972. At that time, the plant's projected sponsible for the waste-torenergy plants, construct)on cost was 1779 milhon. Cur-wiu be sold to Wesunghouse Electric rently. Texas Utlhtles is esumaung its Corp., Pittsburgh. The price wasn*L dis.
share of the construcuon blu will be about,
- closed, 86.7 buhon, it own* 48% cf the plant' to In addluon, Dravo said an agreement in in additler', the unit was scheduled grinciple has teen itached for its Dravo come on line in ISM; now the company es-Automauon Sciences Inc. to t e sold to the Limates the plant will tegin operating unit a management. The company said it sometime after the summer of 1983, Tbt is sult setktng a buyer for Dravo Wellman delays have teen blamed on poor cor.strue.
Co., a matertals handhnt unit.
twn quahty and faulty inspections, in New York Stock Exchart;e comms' Other owters of the p! ant, located 75 lte trading Friday, Dravo's common closed miles southwest of Dallas, are Texas Mu-at $11.875 a share, down C.5 cents, niclpal Power Agency, Brazos Dectnc Analysts said they espect little !! any Puwer Coorerative Inc. and Tex la Elec-
.e n u,," W W t" W 9
- tne 0,iwrative of Tens Ir-cw
t Friday, December 4,19S7 Cr,rDallas porrang Frws 7A Building shortcuts tied to fallen bridge ALBANY,' N.Y. - Construc-tion shortcuts contributed to a
~
thruway bridge collapse that !
killed to teople last April, New '
York Stata's final report en the l disaster said Thursday The ;
thortcuts included o=tssion of features intended to limit ero-sion of the streambed around tne bridge's piers. Such erosion, while Schoharie Creek was at flood stage last April, caused the bridge over the Gov, Thomas E. Dewey Thruway to collapse, the report said. Con-struction and design fisws, which formed a "chain lead:ng to the collapse," made the bridge susceptible to erosion, the, repcrt stated. "If one or more of these items had been changed,it is likely that failure would have been avoided."
t
.. ~,
DOC KEiEC-U5hnC lE JAN 19 40 31 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COT!ISSION OFHCE Si
.t cAuA,, f 00CHEhhG 4 SLFylCT~
BRANCH BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of
}{
}{
TEXAS UTILITIES ELECTRIC
}{
Docket Nos. 50-445 COMPANY, et al.
}{
and 50-446 (Comanche Peak Steam r.l e c t ri c
}{
Station, Units 1 and 2)
}{
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE By my signature below, I hereby certify that true and correct copies of CASE's Progress Report have been sent to the names listed below this 12th day of January, 1988, by:
Federal Express where indicated by
- and First Class Mail elsewhere.
- Administrative Judge Peter B. Bloch Jack R. Newman, Esq.
U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Newman & Holtzinger, P.C.
4350 East / West Highway, 4th Floor 1615 L.
St.,
N.W., Suite 1000 Bethesda, Maryland 20814 Washington, D. C.
20036 Judge Elizabeth B. Johnson Oak Ridge National Laboratory Ms. Janice Moore, Esq.
P. O. Box X, Building 3500 Counsel for NRC Staff Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37830 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
- Dr. Kenneth A. McCollom Maryland National Bank Bldg.
1107 West Knapp Street
- Room 10705 Stillwater, Oklahoma 74075 7735 Old Georgetown Road Bethesda, Maryland 20814
- Dr. Walter H. Jordan Chairman, Atomic Safety and Licensing c/o Carib Terrace Motel Board Panel 522 N. Ocean Blvd.
U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Pompano Beach, Florida 33062 Washington, D. C.
20555 1
Chairman Renea Hicks, Esq.
Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Assistant Attorney General Board Panel Environmental Protection Division U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission P. O. Box 12548 Washington, D. C.
20555 Austin, Texas 78711-7548 Mr. Robert Martin Anthony Z. Roisman, Esq.
Regional Administrator, Region IV 1401 New York Ave.,
N.W., Suite 600 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C.
20005 611 Ryan Plaza Dr., Suite 1000 Arlington, Texas 76011 Mr. Herman Alderman Lanny A. Sinkin Staff Engineer Christic Institute Advisery Committee for Reactor 1324 North Capitol Street Safeguards (MS H-1016)
Washington, D. C.
20002 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C.
20555 Dr. David H. Boltz 2012 S. Polk Dallas, Texas 75224 Robert A. Wooldridge, Esq.
Worsham, Forsythe, Sampels William G. Counsil, Vice President
& Wooldridge Texas Utilities Electric Company 2001 Bryan Tower, Suite 3200 Skyway Tower Dallas, Texas 75201 400 Norrn Olive St., L.B. 81 Dallas, Texas 75201 Robert A. Jablon, Esq.
Spiegel 6 McDiarmid.
Docketing and Service Section 1350 New York Avenue, N.W.
(3 copies)
Washington, D. C.
20005-4798 Office of the Secretary U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Ms. Nancy H. Williams Washington, D. C.
20555 Project Manager Cygna Energy Services l
- Ms. Billie P. Garde 101 California Street, Suite 1000 l
Government Accountability Project San Francisco, California Midwest Office 94111-5894 104 E. Wisconsin Appleton, Wisconsin 54911-4897 William H. Burchette, Esq.
Heron, Burchette, Ruckert & Rothwell Mr. Christopher I. Grimes, Director 1025 Thomas Jefferson Street, N. W.,
l Comanche Peak Project Division Suite 700 Office of Special Projects Washington, D. C.
20007 Mail Stop EWW 302 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission James R. Bailey Washington, D. C.
20555 P. O. Box 7000 Bryan, Texas 77805 Assistant Diro' tor for Inspection Programs Comanche Peak Project Division
(
U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission l
P. O. Box 1029 Granbury, TX 76048 AnwE h$e) l rs.) Juanita Ellis, President l
ASE (Citizens Association for Sound Energy) 1026 S. Polk Dallas, Texas 75224 214/946-9446 2
l
_ _ = _. _.,,