ML20211C600
| ML20211C600 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Mcguire, Wolf Creek, Susquehanna, River Bend, San Onofre, Bellefonte, LaSalle, 05000000, Crane |
| Issue date: | 12/30/1981 |
| From: | Palladino N NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | Bevill T HOUSE OF REP., APPROPRIATIONS |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20209B118 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8702200150 | |
| Download: ML20211C600 (17) | |
Text
_
1
/se meeg\\
UNITED STATES F
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION l
g was,anoron. o. c.aoses s
o j
mm December 30, 1981 The Honorable Tom Bevill, Chairman Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development Conmittee on Appropriations i
j United States House of Representatives Washington, D.C.
20515 i
Dear Mr. Chainnan:
i i
This monthly status report is in response to the direction given in House i
Report 96-1093.
Enclosed is our fourteenth report covering the period from November 15, 1981 to December 15, 1981.
This fourteenth report discusses i
i actions that wert taken during this period on operating reactors and on i
licensing reviews of new facilities.
On December 14, 1981, the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board for TNI-1 issued a Partial Initial Decision concerning'the plant design and procedures. Unit i
separation and emergency planning issues. The NRC staff is currently reviewing the Board findings.
Several changes to operating license applicants' construction completion dates j
have been announced by utilities and are included in this month's report. The i
plants involved are McGuire Unit 2 (from June 1982 to April 1983), Wolf Creek l
Unit 1 (from April 1983 to December 1983), Susquehanna Unit 2 (from April 1983 i
to July 1983), River Bend Unit 1 (from October 1983 to April 1985) and LaSalle
{
Unit 1 (from December 1981 to January 31,1982).
None of the above plants had a projected regulatory delay.
In addition, the applicant for Bellefonte Unit l
-1 us accelerated its construction completion date from June 1984 to September 1983.
The licensing schedule for Bellefonte Unit I has been accelerated l
accordingly so as to continue to project no regulatory delay.
i i
Sincerely.
C7
- (. %.
2.
dA W AvW Nunzio J. Palladino
Enclosure:
NRC Monthly Status Report to Congress
,i cc: The Honorable John T. Myers 0702200150 070206 PDH ADOCK 05000361 I
P PDR
--.--r,,,--_~n.--
<~~~
NRC MONTHLY STATUS REPORT TO CONGRESS This is the fourteenth monthly status report to Congress in response to the direction given in House Report 96-1093. This report provides a discussion of the major actions that were taken on operating reactors and on licensing reviews of new facilities during the period of time between November 15, 1981 and December 15, 1981.
OPERATING REACTORS Thermal Shock To Reactor Pressure Vessels During the last month, we have reviewed the initial (60-day) responses to our. letter of August 21, 1981 from the licensees of eight plants. This information was needed to help enable the staff to assess what actions should be taken to resolve the thermal shock issue. The eight plants (Ft. Calhoun, Robinson Unit 2. San Onofre Unit 1. Maine Yankee, Oconee Unit 1, Turkey Point Unit 4, Calvert Cliffs Unit I and Three 411e Isla'nd Unit 1) were selected on the basis of their vessel irradiation history and their plant system character-istics..The licensees h, ave provided information to assess. current reactor vessel material toughness and to evaluate operating procedures and training relating to the thermal shock issue. The staff evaluation of this issue is continuing.
The staff will also review the licensee's (150-day) responses to our letter of August 21, 1981, as a principal ingredient of our review of this issue.
TMI Unit 1 Restart By Order dated September 11, 1981, the Licensing Board reopened the hearing record on the TM1 Unit I restart proceedings to obtain evidence on allegations of cheating offenses on NRC operator licensing exams.
The Board specifi-cally reserved the right to modify its conclusions presented in the August 27, 1981 partial initial decision on management issues.
The Board
.-,---n.
..e...m_., - -, _ -,,, _.,, _ _. - -...
_,.,...-.._..-..-_.m.-
appointed a Special Master to preside over the reopened hearing which began evidentiary sessions on November 10, 1981.
The hearings closed on December 10, 1981.
It is expected that the record will be held open for a few weeks to receive possible additional exhibits; the Special Master's report is expected.
to be issued in early February. The Board's supplemental initial decision for this area is projected for March 1982.
The Board's initial decision on other major areas of the proceeding, i.e., plant design and procedures, unit separation issues, and emergency planning was issued on Deceaiber 14, 1981.
The NRC staff is currently reviewing the Board's findings.
The Commission has not determined whether restart of TMI Unit 1 will be considered prior to a decision on the cheating allegations.
OPERATING LICENSE APPLICATIONS Licensing Schedules During the past month, the emphasis on licensing activities continued to be.
focused on operating license applications.
The present licensing schedules for all plants with pendir.g OL applications are given in Table 1.
Additional units at the same site with projected construction conpletion in CY 1982 and 1983 are included in Table 1.
The schedules shown for CY 1983 plants and beyond are based on standard assumptions for review and hearing times, except l
for those plants that are expected to be heavily contested (Seabrook Unit 1, Byron 1, and Midland Unit 2).
For those plants, the projected schedules allow for a 13-month (rather than the typical 11-month) hearing phase from issuance of the SSER to Comission decision date on a full-power license.
The staff t
review process for those cases has been accelerated to compensate for the additional time allotted for the hearing process.
The estimated regulatory delays and the target dates for Comission decision l
shown in Table 1 do not reflect any potential igact from the schedules for FEMA findings on off-site emergency preparedness. Any additional potential delays, based on the staff's analysis of the schedules for the FEMA findings, are included in a monthly report to the Senate Subcomittee on Nuclear Regula-tion which is transmitted jointly by the NRC and FEMA.
'Several changes to applicants' construction cogletion dates have been announced t
by the utilities and are included in this month's report. The plants involved are McGuire Unit 2 (from June 1982 to April 1983), Wolf Creek Unit 1 (from April 1983 to December 1983), Susquehanna Unit 2 (from April 1983 to July 1983) and River Bend Unit 1 (from October 1983 to April 1985) and LaSalle Unit 1 (from Decenber 1981 to January 31, 1982, i.e., listed as February 1982).
None of the above plants had a projected regulatory delay.
In addition, the applicant for Bellefonte Unit 1 has accelerated its construction completion date from June 1984 to September 1983. The licensing schedule for Bellefonte Unit 1 has been accelerated accordingly so as to continue to project no regulatory delay.
Cost Estimates The NRC had been obtaining cost estimates associated with the regulatory delays from the Department of Energy on a monthly basis.
00E has stated that they can no longer support this effort and the cost estimates provided in last month's report were the final ones prepared by the Department of Energy.
This month's estimates were prepared by the NRC staff using the assumptions l
l included in the final report prepared by the Department of Energy.
The current cost estimates are set forth in Attachment 1.
. Since the projected regulatory delays have been essentially eliminated (i.e., curre'ntly a total of two months), we plan to discontinue the cost impact delay section in subsequent reports.
PLANT-BY-PLANT DISCUSSION OF DELAYED PLANTS The following is a discussion of the status of the potentially delayed facilities.
Although Diablo Canyon Unit I and San Onofre Unit 2 do not have a projected regulatory delay, they are included in the discussion because they are delayed due to other causes.
G 1.
San Onofre Unit 2 - The hearing on a full-power license has been conpleted and the hearing record is now closed.
The applicant has filed a motion with the Licensing Board for consideration of a decisfon regarding a low-power license.
The scheduled conpletion
~
date for the plant is Decenter'1981. A Board initial decision on a low-power license is projected for early January.
We reported last month that the results of the Senior Reactor Operater (SRO) examinations for San Onofre Unit 2 indicated that 17 of the 18 candidates had failed the written exam.
The actual number that failed
/
is 16 rather than the 17 reported in November.
Two SR0s per shift are required for fuel loading operations.
- Therefore, assuming that the utility remains' with a 5-shift complement, 10 SR0s will be required. The applicant has scheduled 15 SRO candidates for examination in January 1982.
2.
Diablo Canyon Unit 1 - A Commission Order pemitting issuance of a low-power license was issued on September 21, 1981, and the license was issued on September 22, 1981.
Subsequently, errors were found in the seismic design of certain equipment and piping in the plant. Also, based on information supplied by the utility, serious weaknesses were identified in the quality assurance program. Accordingly, on November 19, 1981, the Commission suspended the license to load fuel and conduct tests up to five percent of rated power pending satisfactory completion of the actions specified by the Commission. The staff is continuing to evaluate the seismic design /QA deficiencies at Diablo Canyon.
A Board order on full-power contentions po<tponed a ruling on the equipment qualification issue until the applicant's submittal and the staff's review of this issue were completed and other parties have had an oportunity to review the staff SSER on equipment qualification which was issued in October 1981.
In addition, the Comission directed that two additional contentions be admitted to the full-power proceeding. Issuance of the l
SSER on emergency preparedness is projected for later this month, and the full-power hearing is projected to start in January 1982.
A decision regarding a full-power license is projected for May 1982.
i
. -. ~.
_ - _ ~ -..
NRC MONTHLY STATUS REPORT TO CONGRESS This is the fourteenth monthly status report to Congress in response to the direction given in House Report 96-1093. This report provides a discussion of the major actions that were taken on operating reactors and on licensing reviews of new facilities during the period of time between November 15, 1
1991 and December 15, 1981.
OPERATING REACTORS Thermal Shock To Reactor Pressure Vessels 4
During the last month, we have reviewed the initial (60-day) responses to our letter of August 21, 1 981 from the licensees of eight plants.
This i
i information was needed to help enable the staff to assess what actions should 1
be taken to resolve the thermal shock issue. The eight plants (Ft. Calhoun, Robinson Unit 2, San Onofre Unit 1, Maine Yankee, Oconee Unit 1. Turkey Point Unit 4, Calvert Cliffs Unit I and Three Mile Isla'nd Unit 1) were selected on the basis of their vessel irradiation history and their plant system character-istics. The licensees h, ave provided information to assess, current reactor vessel i
o i
material toughness and to evaluate operating procedures and training relating to the thermal shock issue.
The staff evaluation of this issue is continuing.
The staff will also review the licensee's (150-day) responses to our letter of August 21, 1981, as a principal ingredient of our review of this issue.
TM! Unit 1 Restart l
By Order dated September 11, 1981, the Licensing Board reopened the hearing i
i record on the TMI Unit I restart proceedings to obtain evidence on allegations of cheating offenses on NRC operator licensing exams.
The Board specifi-cally reserved the right to modify its conclusions presented in the August 27, 1981 partial initial decisi.on on management issues.
The Board i
I 6-Sununer Unit 1_ - The hearing regarding reservoir-induced seismicity 3.
is scheduled to begin in mid-January 1982. The projected decision date for a full-power license is May 1982, based on a projected date of April 1982 for a Board initial decision. The projected construction congletion Since we can project date for the facility is the end of February 1982.
the issuance of a low-power license in April 1982, ininediately following the ASLB initial decision, a t*to-month delay is projected for this facility.
CONSTRUCTION PERMIT APPLICATIONS _
The staff is continuing to review the TMI-related items for those construc-tion permit (CP) and manufacturing license (ML) applicants who have submitted 4
l nformation regarding the TMI-related matters (Allens Creek Unit 1, Skagit i
The staff issued f
Units 1 and 2, Black Fox Units 1 and 2, and FNP Units 1-8).
its SSER for Allens Creek Unit 1, FNP Units 1-8 and for Skagit Units 1 and 2.
The The hearing for FNP Units 1-8 was conpleted in early December 1981.
staff review of the TMI-related information for Black Fox Units 1 a The projected licensing schedules for pending CP and ML applications progress.
are given in Table 2.
Tables Licensing Schedules for Pending OL Applications 1.
Licensing Schedules for Pending CP and ML Applications 2.
Attachment Estimates of Costs Due to Licensing Delays l
-- -~
,___e
_.-_-,,~-_.s_
_y_
y-
q G
e 4
TABLES O
O
Olvl510Il O LICE 55tIIG 12/15/81 TABLE 1 Licensing Schedales for All Pending (A Applicattees IFage 1 of 4)
IIncludes Schedules for Addittenal Unlts with Projected Construction Completten in CY 1982-1983)
IListed in Order et Frejected Easumission Decision Datel 5ER SSER Est Staff Staff ASL9 Comm. 1/ Appl.
Plant (Months 1 DES Input to DL SER Mtg FES Input to DL SSER -
Start of Initial Dec.
Constr.
Delay issue Technical Issee ACRS Issue Technical Issue 11/
Hearing Decisten Date Compt.
LaSalle 1 0 2/
C C
C C
C C
C lione leone 02/02 2f 02/82 2/
~
l Grand Gulf 1 0
C C
C C
C C
C lione None 02/82 02/02 l
San Onofre 2 0 _3/
C C
C C
C C
C C
02/82 03/82 3/ 12/81 3/
4 Summer 1 24/
C C
C C
C C
C 01/82 04/82 05/82 02/82 l
watts 8er 1 0
C 12/18/81 2/05/82 3/04/82 C
3/26/82 4/12/82 Ilone mone 05/82 08/82 Olable Canyon 1 0 SJ C
C C
C C
C C
01/82 E/ 04/82 05/82 03/81 l
Blable Canyon 2 0 C
C C
.C C-C C
01/82 6/ 04/82 05/82 07/82 Susquehaana 1 04/
C C
C C
C.
C C
C 04/82 05/82 04/82 LaSalle 2 0
C C
C C
C 4/01/82 5/01/82 leone leone 06/82 12/82 McGuire 2 0
C C
C C
C 4/01/82 5/01/82 C
C 06/82 04/83 l#IP-2 0
C 2/12/82 3/12/82 4/09/82 12/31/81 4/30/82 5/28/82 Ilone Ilone 07/82 12/82 Zlamer 1 0
C C
C C
C C
C 01/82 06/82 07/82 07/82 San Onofre 3 0
C C
C C
C 6/01/62 7/01/82 C
02/82 08/82 11/82 Femt 2 0
C C
C C
C C
C 03/82 08/82 09/82 11/82 l
Shoreham 1 0
C C
C C
C t/0e/22 2/08/82 03/82 08/82 09/82 09/82
)
i Comanche Peak 1 0 C
C C
C C
1/06/82 1/15/82 12/81 7/ 09/82 10/82 06/83 St. Lucle 2 0
C C
C C
- 1/15/82 12/17/81 12/23/81 Ilone leone 10/92 10/82 Seb-Total 2
i 4
l
n n.
- s..
N N
- n - n - - n n n
.A n
n e
e e
e e e e e e e e e e e e e - %
N N
-g g%
g g g g O - O g O w w ~
~
.=
O ke g e=
.h O
i l
-i N
N N
M m m M
m m m
m m M
m M
M m
e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e
O N
N
- =-
%.=
E U. *e*
O -
E E E $eO E S vuo
- - - O O
g a
k 5
N N
8 e e e e e N
- m -
i e e e e e e N
u N
.e..
e e e e d g g g E
2 e ** em.
~
O O
g g O O
O o
N Mg g-O O m
p e
N
==
E O
O em
~
O N
I
%. i 9
N N
N N
N N
N m
m M
N N
E G9 "p=l -
M.s g
e e g
a g
g g
g g
e e g
g e
a=
t=
b Q
C W *=
=.
C
=
N g
m g g C
N g g m
h g
C O
O W
em O
gg C
e e-N M
N N
N M
N N
M M
M N.
M.
E e e
e.
e e.-
e e
e m e.
E.=
W e
.=
=.
G
- tad en - O e e-O O e=
O O O w es O e
e en en c=
M N
O M
M C m M
m ed N
M C
C C
lllb
- en
- =
N N
M in E=D W
te 9
49
==
0 C
e=
==
om e=
e=
e=
==
,N
- J e=
=
4 C
W W O
= c
K E N N
t
. eE
== 0 N
N N
M N
N M
N N
N M
N N
O M
M en o
e e
e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e
O c=
e=
==
Q ed uO r
ene W W
= = *
- te e
N e=
0 O
c=
to O
N C
O
- = W -
O - -
O==
e=
==
N O *=
0 O
O
=
em
=.
8 =O
- h. K &
N N
- m m N
W W
m W
O e
O O
Egt Sg3 w J W
u n t.m 3
e S
N N
N N
N N
N N
M N
N ef N
6 ed u
e e e
e e e e e e so en eD so
- e. U p
m i
l O W Gn in N
LM to til to tn to O en to N
en O
tad
.= - O - U O
O O O C D
N O
O h
em na.
- ==
W 4
t=. *6 b
N M
w W
h M
O m N
D N
N A S,g l
O N
N N
N N
N N
m N
N ew e
em 3 6
e3 e e e e e e e e SD e
e m.
3 m* n=
63 e
e9 c
=. O af se u u u en w e
e-u e=
w O
an nn en w
g C Q ed O
O O
O O
e=
O O
u u O
3O"e
- e. D b
auE E N
m m en to te e w -
O to K
w,3 u
u e4.=
N N
N N
N N
N M
N N
N as e
4.
c o e
e e e e e e e e e e a0 O C O 3
O es U O w to O
w C
3K em
==
==
v' en en no en sed u U U en sn n en O
O O
O
- = O O
e O
O U
U O
et==
at
== en G.
om N
N w
nn en e M
O 0%
in O e.c tij n
W 9 w
en
==
nC **
cp
=a en O
d e= Q a=
N N
N N
N M
N N
ew si.
J b
==
e cc e ac to e e e e 80 ED CD ed en===
=
sr e-w h
e e
en= u O r=
m O
to en h== ed in e
e eC O
u u O
O O
u e
O O
O O u u O
3 N
th a
w e
- K ed r
m to u 3 m
N
- m w w e=
'O
& db e=
e=
e,
>= c Gdb aE I
M N
N N
N N
ew N
N ea so en en e e e e to eo
==
==
(
W 3 5M
=.
9 en e d W
U U
e U U nn W en en to N
to no O
U en
==
n C
C.
O O
N c
O O
h
=
e 3
me
==
N e
N N
e -
N m
N u
g 8
-e 9
to
.=*
e
%K wl Oj O
en - C O
O O
O O
O O O O O
O O O O O
O
- e **
I i
Sk N
.af N
="*
o=
o=
N e
e e=
C a=
m N
e h
e=
g C
T
==
W e,
ed a=
e=
w "O.
"O a=
b C
N e-C 6
e es O
9 C
W
.gr h
6 e=
e es e
=
N e
es O
C
=
em 4.
K e-4' e
O e
o e
T a=
C 3
b O
u C
.O en=
0 W
C O
&nd e#
e e
b em C
3 De e
B b
6 C
e >=
et h
C' b
==
e e-W
.O O
e O.
t e-O ed C
4 e=
em 6
g ed e-e
- O
.O e
e"R A
- == **
EC lb.
g e
e e=
4 h
C 3
el
==
W W
==
Sp 4
3 O
ek em
==
e
- * > =
LP O.
3 O
3 e
3 to. &
E b) e 5
la b
W E
in e
l
'o
..)
1 DIV1510110F LICENSING 12/15/81 TABLE 1 Licensing Schedules for All Pending OL Appilcettens IFage 3 of 4)
(includes Schedules for Addittonal Units with Frojecte6 ConstrucElon Completten in CT 1982-1983)
(Listed Ir. Order or Projected Commelssion sectston Datel SER 55ER Est Staff Staff ASLS Comm.1/ Appl.
Delay issue Technical Issue ACRS Issue Technical Issue 11/ Start of Initial Dec. - Constr.
Plant (Months)
OES Input to DL SER Mtg FES Input to DL
$5ER - Hearing Decision Date_
Compt.
So. Texas 1 0
04/ J 06/83 07/83 08/83 09/83 08/83 08/83 01/84 06/84 07/84 07/84 Limerick 1 0
05/83 07/83 08/83 09/83 10/83 10/83 11/83 04/84 09/84 10/84 10/84 Harris 1 0
10/82 06/83 07/83 08/83 03/83 12/83 01/84 06/84 11/84 12/84 12/84 4
Braldwood 1 0
01/84 11/83 12/83 01/84 06/84 04/84 05/84 10/84 03/85 04/85 04/85 Sub-Total 0
Total 2
f i
l l
sm.
y e
~
(Page 4 of 4)
TABLE 1 FOOTNOTES 1/
Licensing schedules and decision dates do not reflect additional potential delay from Emergency Preparedness Rev few.
2/
Janua ry 31, 1982 is the applicant's projected construction completion date. NRC will be prepared to decide on whether to issue an operating license for I.aSalle Unit I which will authorize fuel loading and low-power operation up to 51 power about January 20, 1982. A Commission decision regarding operation above 5% power will be made on a schedule consnensurate with the applicant's need for full-power authoriza tion.
3/
No delay is projected for San Onofre Unit 2 because the unit will not have a sufficient number of licensed SR0s to pennit fuel loading before January 1982, even though a decision on a low-power license could have been projected for January 1982.
4/
The estimated delay for each of these plants reflects early issuance of low-power licenses inanediately following ASLB decision.
5f The delay has been reduced to zero based on the design errors found at the facility.
6]
The projected date for an off-site emergency preparedness finding for Diablo Canyon was not met.
This may impact the hearing schedule.
ff liearing starts for Comanche Peak and Callaway are for limited selected issues.
Full hearing
]
schedules remain unchanged, hence ASLB initial decision dates remain unchanged.
8f Additional ACRS meeting for Waterford Unit 3 required to discuss management organization.
9/
lleavily contested plants reflect 13-month hearing schedule (vs 11 months) from SSER to Commission decision date. Consnissioner Ahearne remains convinced this schedule is to optimistic.
j 10f Midland Units 1 and 2 have the same hearing.
i j
1]f Date shown is for first SSER following ACRS meeting. Addltional SSER will be issued to close out remaining open items.
Currently no impact on subsequent milestones.
i l
i i
A i
TABLE 2 LICENSING SCNCDULES DIVISION OF LICENSING 12/15/61 FOR PENOllIG CURSTilDCTIUK l't1511T APPLICA110NS SSER (TMI Issces')
SSER (Non-TMl Issues)
ASL8 Cammt ssIe issue issue Staff Technical Issue Staff Technical issue ACRS Start of 4/ Initial Decistos Plant DES 35_
Input to DL SSER Input to DL SSER Meeting -
Hearing - Dectston Date FNP l-8 C
C C
C C
C C
C 5/82 6/82 Atlas.s Creek 1 C
C C
C C
C C
3/82 8/82 9/82 i
tlack Fox 1 & 2 C
C C
12/81 C
12/81 N/5 8/82 1/83 2/83 Skagit/Hanford 1 & 2 3/82 1/
8/82 1/
C C
4/82 6/82 1/82 11/82 4/83 5/83 Pebble Springs 1 & 2 C
C N/5 N/5 N/5 N/5 N/5 2/32 3/
N/5 3/
N/5 3/
Parkins 1, 2, 3 C
C N/5 2/
N/5 2/
N/5 N/5 N/5 N/5 N/5 N/5 2/
1/ As a result of fleid emplorations conducted by USGS, the selsele design of the facility must be re-enselped. Appilcants Indicated in September 1980 that the proposed facility is to be relocated to the Nanford reservation. Amended ER and PSAR will be filed in December 1981.
2f By letter dated 3/12/81, the applicant recommended that the NRC not devote any resources beyond support for the alternate site hearing for the prat two years.
response to a 4/28/81 board order, the app 1lcant stated (5/14/81) an interest fn pursuing the review with respect to completing the hearing 3/ In However, the appilcant has not indicated when they propose to resume activities related to the safety m environmental and site sultability issues.
leview, particularly on IMl-related issues, therefore, a Commission decision date is not projected at this time for this fecility.
4/ Dates shown are for resumption of hearings following restseption of Ilcensing activities for pending CP appilcations.
I I
l 1
1
e e
e ATTACHMENT 1 g
O e
A s
ATTACt9ENT 1 I
ESTIMATED COSTS OF REGULATORY DELAYS FOR NUCLEAR tattTS COSTS 8ASED ON DOE A55UprTIONSJ/
COSTS BASED ON COMPANY DATA _1/
Replacement 2/
Replacement 3/
Replacement 5/
Replacement Projected Power Capacity Power Total 4/
Power
- Capacity Power Total 6/
Unit Delay Costs Factor Costs Cost -
Costs Factor Costs Cost -
Months
$f94/ttonth Percent t/ksh
$894
$494/ Month Percent s/kwh
$MM (1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7) 18)
Summer 1 2
12.7 65 3.0 25 8.5 60 2.2 17 (900 MW) 1/ Based on infor1sation provided in the November DOE cost estimate report.
2/ Cost of replacement power minus fuel and operating costs of nuclear unf t.
3/ Replacement power costs divided by kilowatt-hours replaced. (Column 2 ; Column 3 ; Unit Capactty (900 IN) ; 720 hours0.00833 days <br />0.2 hours <br />0.00119 weeks <br />2.7396e-4 months <br /> / month).
4/ Derived by multiplying monthly replaceant power costs (Column 2) by total months of delay (2 months).
-5/ Cost of replacement power -7/
minus nuclear feel costs of 6 allis/twh. Estimates do not include capactty charges which may be incurred if power is purchased from other systems.
6,/ Derived by multiplying monthly replacement power costs (Column 5) by total months of delay (2 months).
7,/ Replacement power is self-generated from coal-oll af sture.
f
- J
4 js
- t UNITED STATES I i NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
/f wasHacTow.o.c.aosas 3 $9_-%'"?}(I orectorTMs January 29, 1982 CHAIRf.iAN The Honorable Tom Bevill, Chairnan Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development Connittee on Appropriations United States House of Representatives l
Washington, D. C.
20515
Dear Mr. Chairman:
This monthly status report is in response to the direction given in House Report 96-1093. Enclosed is our fifteenth report covering the period from December 15, 1981 to January 15,'1982. This fifteenth report discusses actions that were taken during this period on operating reactors and on licensing reviews of new facilities.
On December 14, 1981, the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board for TMI-1 issued a Partial Initial Decision concerning the plant design and procedures, Unit separation and emergency planning issues. The NRC staff is reviewing the 0,
Board findings. The Board estimates that a decision on the cheating issue will not be made until March or April.1982. On January 7,1982, the U.S. Court of Appeals directed the NRC to consider the. psychological effects-on the loca1' population of the restart of THI-1. The Comnission is considertng various courses of action to address this finding.
Pre-hearing conferences have begun on the Indian Point 2 a.nd 3 hearing. The NRC Staff has given its initial responses to the issues raised by the Board.
The hearing is scheduled for conpletion by Septenber 18,1982.
During this report period, changes in the constrsction conpletion dates for Susquehanna Unit 1 (from April 1982 to July 1982), LaSalle Unit 2 (from December 1982 to January 1983) and Grand Gulf (from February 1982 to March 1982) have been announced by the utilities and are included in this month's report. These pl' ants did not have a, projected regulatory delay.
Sincerely, O[{.HlL.
- s 4t d
AAA Nunzio J. Palladino'
Enclosure:
NRC Monthly Status Report to Congress l
cc: The Honorable John T. Myers g
- - ' ^
e NRC MONTHLY STATUS REPORT TO CONGRESS This' is the fifteenth monthly status report to Congress in response to the direction given in House Report 96-1093. This report provides a discussion of the major actions that were taken on operating reactors and on licensing reviews of new facilities during the period of time between December 15, 1981 and January 15, 1982.
TMIdnit1 Restart On December 14, 1981, the Licensing Board issued a partial initial decision on plant design, plant separation and emergency planning issues. The Board determir.ed that TMI-1 can restart and. operate up t.o five percent of design power pending the Board's decision,concerning the cheating question on NRC. operator licensing exams. The Board specified a number of requirement's which nust be met prior. to rest'ar't. The Special Master, appointed to preside over th'e hearing on the ch' eating matter, is expected to issue his report in early February. Th.e
' Board estimates that its final d'ecision on the cheating matter will not be issued until March or April 1982.
t
'On January 7,1982, the U.S. Court of Appeals essentially ordered the NRC to keep TMI-1 shut down until the NRC conducts an. environmental assessment on the effect of psychological stress on the people in the area. The Commission
~
is cons'idering various courses of action to address this development.
e e
e o
S
,w.,-,
Steam generator tube leaks were detected in both steam generators at TMI.1 during the licensee's testing of the plant in. late November 1981. An intensive program has been underway since that time to determine the" extent and cause of the failures. The problem is major and will probably require plugg'ing or sleeving of several thousand tubes.
It is estimated that repairs to steam generator tubes will result in at 1, east a six month delay in the readiri,ess of the reactor for restart. The full extent of the st'eam generator tube problem is not yet known. However, correction of this problem is at present the pacing item for plant readiness to restart.
Indian Point Special Investigative Proceeding The Comission's Order' of May 30, 1980 announced its intention to hold a discretionary adjudicatory hearing before an Atomic Safety and Licensing Board for the resolution of saf'ety issues related specifically to Indian Point Unit's 2 and 3.
A subsequent Order dated January 8,1581 identified the specific issues that would be addressed in the special investigative proceeding. A Comission Memorandum and Order dated September 18, 1981 appointed an ASLB panel and' established the completion date for the hearing as September 18, 1982.
A pre-hearing conference was conducted on December 2,1S81. On December 31, 1981, the staff (1) submitted to the Board a Statement of Position on each of the issues,'and (2) responded to approximately 45 contentions that had been filed by eleven petitioners to intervene in
~
the proceeding. A hearing to receive limited appearance statements was held 'on January 21-23, 1982.
.. u 3-OPERATING LICENSE APPLICATIONS Licensing Schedules During the past month, considerable emphasis continued to be focused on operating license applications activities. The present licensing schedules for all plants with pending OL applications are given in Table 1.
Plants are listed chronologically according to Comission decision date. The schedules shown for CY 1983 plants and beyorid are based on standard assumptions for review and hearing times, except for those plants that are. expected to be heavily contested (Seabrook Unit 1, Byron 1 and Midland-Unit 2). For those plants, the projected schedules allow for a 13-month (rather than the typical 11-month) hearing phase from issuance of the Staff Supplemental Safety Evaluation Report (SSER)' to Comission decision date on a full-power license.. The staff review process for those cases has been accelerated to compensate for the additional time a1 Totted for the 1 earing process.
3 The estimated regulatory delays and the target dates for Comission decision shown in Table 1 do not reflect any potential inpact from the schedules for 9
FEMA findings on off-site emergency preparedness. Any additional potential delays, based on the staff's analysis of the schedules for the FEMA findings, are included in a monthly report to the Senate Subcomittee on Nuclear Regu-lation, which is. transmitted jointly by the NRC and FEMA.
During this report period, changes in the construction completion date for Susquehanna Unit 1 (from April 1982 to July 1982) snd LaSalle Unit 2 (from December 1982 to January 1983),' and Grand G'ulf Unit 1 (from February 1982 to March 1982) have been announced by the utilities. These plants did not have a projected regulatory' delay.
e
-gew-i--+-v---w v+,,,,-,,--,.i-.,.-6----,w-v.,r
---,m---wm---,wy,
.w
-,--,.--,.ei-.-
-mww-r----,- -,w,-,,.-,-
- - + - - - - - - - -, - - - -
\\
PLANT-BY-PLANT DISCUSSION OF DELAYED PLANTS The only plant presently projected to have a regulatory delay is Summer l'.
Although Diablo Canyon Unit 1 and San Onofre Unit 2 do not have a pro-jected regulatory delay, they are included in the discussion because they are delayed due to oth,er causes.
- 1. ' San Onofre Unit 2 - As discussed in last month's report, the sched01ed completion date.for the plant was December 1981. The NRC has confirmed that only a few items remain to be completed.
A Board initial decision regarding a low-power license was issued on January ll,1982.
Last months's report. indicated that. a number of operators failed O
their license examinations.' Additional examinations for 15 SRO candidates are scheduled to begin in late January 1982.
. "The applicant has initiated a quality assurance reverification pro-gra'm with emphasis on the seismic design of the facility. The General Atomic Conpany (GA) has been contracted to do an independent design review. An interim report on GA's findings was, issued on Janua.ry 25, 1982, with a final report scheduled for March 1982. NRC will conduct an audit of GA's results infter their coupletion.
2.
Diablo Canyon Unit 1 - As discussed in last montn's report, on November 19, 1981, the Comission suspended the license to load fuel '
and conduct. tests up to five percent of rated power due to the errors found in the seismic design of certain, equipment and piping in the plant.. The staff 'is continuing to evaluate.the. seismic design /QA l
l deficiencies at Diablo Canyon.
l l.
(
,s
.. ~.
. \\
The full-power hearing started on January,19,1982. A Comission decision regarding a. full-power license is projected for May 1982.
Issuance of the Staff SSER on emergency preparedness has been delayed pending receipt of additional information from FEMA.
3.
Sumer Unit 1 - The hearing regarding rese,rvoir-induced seismicity and limited emergency planning issues began on January l'1,1982. The projected decision date for a full-power license is May 1982, based on a projected date of April 1982 for a Board initial decision. The projected construction completion date for the facility is the end of February 1982. Assuming a favorable Board decision, a low-power license will be issued in April 1982, imediately following the ASLB initial decisi.on. This results in a projected two-month delay for this facility.
~
CONSTRUCTION PERMIT. APPLICATIONS In August, it was reported that the Comissio.n approved a final rule re-l garding TMI-related requirements applicable to Construction Permit and Manufacturing License (CP/ML) applications filed prior to the TMI-2 accident.
l The rule establishes the licensing' requirements that resulted from the Comission's ongoing efforts to apply the lessons learned from the accident at THI-2.. The rule was projected to be published in the Federal Register in October 1981. Subsequent to the Comission's approval of the rule, further discussions were held with the staff regarding changes to the rule.
On October 13, 1981, the Comission directed the staff to prepare certain clarifying additional mod'ifications to the rule for Comission consideration.
~
~
l
6-The clarifying modifications were provided a'nd the Comission reaffirmed its approval of CP/ML Rule 'on Decenter 22, 1981. The Rule [s p'rojected.to be published in,the Federal Register in January 1982 and will become effective 30 days after publication.
The staff review of the TMI-rekated information for Black Fox Units 1, and 2 has been corrpleted and an SSER was issued on December 31, 1981.
The projected ifcensing schedules for the remaining pending CP and ML applications are given in Table 2.
1 i
Tables 1.
Licensing Schedules for Pending OL Appli' cations 2.
Licensing Schedules for Pending CP and ML Applications l
i s
e e
-9 y
y,_.
g y
y,
9 e O " ' OO M*64 b
9 9 epee *= GNum% eg9e-
- 9e g
O e
e a
8 e
e e
o D
e e
G e
9 9
4 f
e e
O TABLES e
G GS O
e 0
e G
G e
e G
e e
o e
o G
e
en--,--
-4
- j.
i elvi5 ten er tittw511u-
~ ~ ~-"~~,1 ?
1/
l-1 ticensing Scl e les for lag OL Applicitlens
~
.4-(e., I af 4)
,(lacInde_s Scheiheles for Addittenal hits erlth pr ed Constructlen Complities 11 CY 1982-1983)
~~
(Listed la order e f PrrJecteJFausmisslan Decislen Datt) 5ER 55Et
[?
Est Staff Staff A$tt Camus.1/ Appl.
+
nelay issue Technical Issue Acts issue
- Techalcal issue tel Start of Ialtlal nec.
Constr.
l Plant
- {# baths [
OE 5 _
lapet to HL SER R
IES
@ L to DL
$5ER ~
Hearing Becislen Date Camph i
j
~ C C
C C
02/s2 y o2/s2 y r'
tasaile I ey C
C t
l Grand Gelf i e
C C
C C
C C
C none usae 82/82 03/52 San thofre 2 e 3/
C C
C C
C C
C C
C 03/82 3/ 01/82 3/
5esumer 1 24/
C
'C C
C C
C
,C C
04/02 05/s2 02/82 stable Canyon 1 0 5/
C C
C C
C C
C SI/82 5/ 04/82 05/02 e3/Al l*
stablo. Canyon 2 e C
C C
C C
C C
09/82 s/ 04/02 05/02, 01/82 C
C C
'C
.04/82 05/82 07/82 Sessapeehanna 1 0
C C
C-C LaSalle 2 e
C C
C C
i
, C 4/ 01/ s2 5/ 01 / 8 2 lesne none 06/82 01/03 watts aar i e
C 3/l2/s2 4/05/s2 5/e4/s2 C
5/26/s2 s/12/s2 mene leone 07/s2 an/s2 unr-2 e
C 2/12/s2 3/06/s2 4/e9/s2 C
4/30/s2 5/2s/s2 asne none oF/02 12/82 2 ammer i e
C C
C C y/
C C
C et/s2 es/s2 07/s2 er/s2
. San enetre 3 e
C C
C C
C 5/01/ s2 7/ 01/ s2 C
et/s2 On/s2 II/n2 l
]
Fenal 2 e
C C
C C
C C
C 03/82 08/82 09/82, 11/02 Shorehan I e
C C
.C C
C t/30/s2 2/ce/s2 e3/s2 se/s2 39/s2 09/s2 Cneanche peak I e C
C C
C C
C 1/15/s2 C
09/82 10/82 06/83 i-
[
- St.Lucie2
_ e.
C C
C C
2/15/s2 C
C none leone 10/st' 10/s2 Sub intal 2
.e O
i.
l W
k
r j
k 3
, ~*
/H
. t i, r
3 2
2 3
3 3
3 3
3 3
3 3
s 3
3 3
)
s s s e 3
n s s s e s s s s s s s s l sp / / / / n / / / / / / / / /
I
/ / /
g.-
'2 2
pn s
l e
t
/ s g
2 7
5 7
9 4
I I
po e
l t
s g
o o 1
e e e,s e e I
I 1
1 e
- Acc, o
e-f I'
t 2
2 3
3 3
3 3
3 3
3 3
3 3
3 3
3 s
e.i s s s e 3
s s s s s s s s s s s e s m ct i / / / e / / / / / / / / / / / / /
m oea o
I I
l
/
3 4
4 t
s 7
s 9
e I
I 2
2 u
csn l
I I
e 3
e 0
e e e 0
0 e,
o l
I I
1 1
s t
n w
t o ai 2
2 2
2 e
3 3
2 3
3 2
e 3
3 2
2 3
n l s s s s s n s e s s s 0
n s s s s s u
eLi
/ / / /
o / / / / / /
o
/ / / / /
s tI c t
0 o 2
c n 3
3 4
4 s
7 e
t e e 9
s l
e
),
5ne e
1 l
1 e e e e e e e
l l
0 e s
3 Aio e
8 e
9
/
r 1
9 ts t
/
/
/
/
s s
s 9
es 9
1 a
2 t
2 2
2 2
2 s
3 3
t 2
tl s s s c e s s s s e e e s s c 8 T
rr C / / /
n / / c / /
t n / / /
/
C ae 5
3 r
o s o 1
I f
l 4
3 5
1 e
o te e e o n e t
1 I
e I
e e e 1
h Sn
/s n
/I-S e
t t
2 2
2 2
3 2
2 3
2 2
2 3
2 2
3 3
3 i
)
e s s 8
s s s s s s s s s s s e e s s s, t ue
/ /
/ / / / / / / / / / / / / / /
e n
st 5
1 C
1 l
l 0
0 l
c o e 4
9 e
l l
l s5 1
3 3
o o 3
3 e
3 3
3 2
2 3
o e o o es Ta I5
/ /
/ / / / / / /- / / / / / / / /
l t
t I
1 3
1 2
3 5
3 s s 9
s I
o e I
l oE I
t l
I l
c n e
i l
i s
t etI 5
Aii c
5 t
pc i
e la 2
2 2
3 2
2 3
t 2
2 3
2 2
3 3
3 NUs a
s s s s s s s s s s s s s s 0
s co
/
/ / / / / / / / / / / / / / /
s n lt s
2 l
l e e l
5 e
2 7
s o l
1 i
no t a C
I C
1 o o l
l e
1 l
1 2
e l
e 0 v
iht.
gei
/
/ / / / / / / / / / / / / / /
n s
IT ac I,
3 2
I 3
5 2
s s 9
5 l
o 9
o e 5T y te 1
l t
1 l
s i
m l
2 2
2 2
2 2
2 2
2 2
2 2
' N
/ /
/
/ /
/ / / / / / /
/
s.3 0
s s s'
s s s e
s s s s e
d es 5
2 5
s s s s 0
s s 2
s s.2 o o 1
o e
se 1
1 C
1 c C o e c o o e
t sr
/ /
/
/ /
/ / / / / / / c /
r c
I I
2 3
4 s
7 7
o 5
2 o
2 7
o e
l 1
t ft j
f o
/
sE r
7 e
P 2
2 2
2 2
2 t
3 2
2 2
l s
- s
/
/ / /
/ / / / / /
/
s s s s s s S
s s s s
u t t
d s e ee c C C 5
c 4
5 7
c I
s e 5
s s s
e i
ci 0
e 0 0 e e c c e I
o l
1 h m r An
/
/ / /
/ / / / / /
/
c e
3 5
3 5
s s 9
4 l
e s
d stt i
l a r 2
2 2
2 t
2 r
3 t
2 2
n o n~e
~ e s
s s s s s a s s s s
n ee
/
/ / /
/ / / / / /
/
IUI s
.st c C C l
c s
'7 7
c e s s e 4
7 s
nI sS o
o e o l
o e l
e e c c e cR e
d I
/
/ / /
/ / / /
/
/
/e 9 5
e e
2 4
2 4
5 5
s 3
iA t
t l
s S
Lr i
t e L le 2
2 t
2 t
z 3
2 2
t t
(
a s s s s s s s s s s
- Tco
/ / /
/ / / / / /
/
s
.f i t 2
l 7
e s t
I 4
7 s
t an c C C c c 1
e e c l
e o I
0 e c c e th
/ / /
/ / / / / /
/
e sca l
3 t
3 4
4 7
2 9 s 4
d ee e
Tn h
i c
S t
t t
2 2
2 2
s e,
s s S s s s s
e u S_
/ / / / / /
/
d st c C c c.
c c c c c s s s 2
s s c c s s s_
u e e a 2
e o e
I
/ /
t
/ / /
/
tc 2
2 s
l 7
5 2
a l
l{
ts yh
'e tat sl n e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e
te.Dn i
2
)
2 t
4 I
i I
i
- 2 a
3 2
a e
r I
e t
n e
d i e r
'e d
d i
2 r
e n 2 i t
n d
i l
y r
r e
e a n e t
r e
a e
o n e s I
r h
I d
a.
e s e e
h d
t t_
a f
f e
r c
c n i I
r e v c
n e
n w a
a r
t l
s n
i r-l a
l e
t/
e a
l s
y a
w e
r r
n a
T l
l e
e n
u t
e t
s r
d t
l v
a l
n d
b P
l l
t i
G t
r i
s a
a a
l c
a y
n e e l
a e
e e
a a
u 1(
c P
W c M w s u S
P n c s s S
P c i S
M r
8
,i#
]
j
)
J i1
\\j);
I
~
^'
s O
. t..*l. 3. v
~.
ei m.
t'w wl. o D 'E is 2 3;
M s-i E
aas:
n:
l..
=. _2._2 :
3 was o
8 2.5 g g g g g
s s s s
==-
8 8 =3
_: =
515 E
8
~
8
.I.
E 3 3 3 s s s s 2_3 5 3 8 2 m
5 3l
=
m-n.
f.
g
.w
~
2
- a 8 = ss 5
_0 5 SY f
_d 3
W 8
I s s s s
_FH
- * "I 8
E t
-]
9.
a t
3 s L, W M.
M.,
M.
3 6
I" El*@
m.
'E R = '8
- o 36 2 ep 6
u m.
~ e.
h s s s %
6 WE 8 8 85 6
M 5
_F_lb n.
A.
e.
n.
f.
s s s s 3 8 3 2 g"
og !
- 06 25 28
. 3 "I s s s s 13 8 N g M
j
.f.
3 3 3 3 8
~ s s s 3 $ 2 a 2
-y d.
- gst.
aJEI l
W m.
g g 3 5
w.
ET r, A. 3
% $' 2 I t St 2 a N.
, _. _ _ _ ~ -,. - -.
(Page 4 of 4).
TABLE 1 l
~
FOOTNOTES i
-1/
Licensing schedules and decision dates'do not reflect additional potential delay from Emergency Preparedness Review.
~~2/
Jan'uary 31, 1982 is the appilcant's projected construction completion date. NRC will be prepared to decide on whether to issue an' operating Ilcense for LaSalle Unit I which will authorize fuel loading and low-power operation up to 5% power prior to plant completion. A Commission decision regarding operation above 5% power will be made on 1
a schedule commensurate with the applicant's need for full-power authorization,.
i
-3/
No delay is projected for San Onofre Unit 2 because the unit will not have a sufficient number of licensed SR0s to permit fuel loading before ' late January or February 1982. An ASLB decision was issued on January 11, 1982.
The NRC staff will act on a low-power license upon satisfactory completion of the facility and upon having '
adequate licensed plant staff for operation.
~
~
4/
The estimated delay of this. plant reflects the early issuance of a low-power license immediately following ASLB
~
decision.
5/
The delay has been reduced to zer'o based en design errors found at the facility.
.6/
The p,rojected date' for an off-site emergency preparedness finding for Diablo Canyon has been delayed, but this delay.
will not impact the start of the full-power hearing (January 19, 1982).
7/
Additional ACRS meeting for Waterford Unit 3 required to discuss management organization.
I 8/
Ileavily contested plants reflect 13-month hearing schedule (vs 11 months) from SSER to Commission decision date.
Commissioner Ahearne remains convinced this schedule is too optimistic.
~
9/
Midland Units 1 and 2 have the same hearing.
t 10/ Date shown is for first SSER following ACRS meet'ing. Additional SSER will be issued to close out remaining
~
open items. Currently no ' impact on subsequent, milestones.
i I
11/ The ACRS has requested that a subcommittee review Quality Assurance issues with regard to construction.
i
,1_2/ pate was recently revised. The NRC staff is reevaluating the SER dates.
2 1
- )
TAnl[ 2 LICEN5ileG SCllEDilLES DIVl510110F LICEN51NG 1/I5/82
FOR PfleDING CDilllRMNAPPLICATIONS SSER (TMI Issues)
SSER (Non-lMI Issues)
A5tB Comels'slen issue issue staff Technical.
Issue Staff Technical Issue ACil5 Start of 4/ Initial Decision Plant DES FE5 Input to DL
$$[R Input to DL SSER.
Meeting llearing Decision.
Date fler l-8 C
C C
C C
C C.
C 5/82 8/82 All2r Creek 1 C
C C
C C
C C
3/82 8/82 11/82 Blad Foz 1 & 2 C
C C
C C
C N/5 8/82 1/83 4/83 5kagtt/Hanford I & 2 3/821/
8/821/
C
~
C 4/82 6/82 7/82 11/82 4/83 7/83
~
Pebbl2 Springs 1 & 2 C
C N/5
,N/5 N/5 N/5 N/5 2/82 3/
M/S 3f.
N/5 3/
Pertins I. 2. 3 C
C N/5 2)
N/5 2/
N/5 N/5 N/5 N/5 N/5 N/5 y lj As a result of field emplorations conducted by USGS. the seismic
- design of the facility must be re-examined. Applicants Indicated in September 1980 th L the proposed facility is,to be relocated to the Nanford reservation. Amended ER and PSAR will be filed in December 1981.
y By letter dated 3/12/88, the applicant recommended that the NRC mot devote any resources beyond support for the alternate site hearing for the nest two years.
3J la response to a 4/28/81
Deard order,
the applicant stated (5/14/81) an laterest la pursuing the review with respect to completing the hearing on environmental and site suitability issues.. Nowever, the applicant has.not Indicated when they propose to resume activities related to the safety review, particularly on TMI-related issues, therefore. a Commission decision date is not projected at this time for this facility.
4/ D:les slumen are for resumption of hearings following resumption of II' censing actlylties for lending CP applications.
i
?
e G
^
__