ML20138N119

Transcript of 851118 Meeting W/Util in Bethesda,Md to Discuss Const Schedule & Readiness for Fuel Load.Pp 1-61. Supporting Documentation Encl

ML20138N119
Person / Time
Site:	Nine Mile Point
Issue date:	11/18/1985
From:	NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
To:
Shared Package
ML17055A938	List: ML20138N119
References
NUDOCS 8512230376
Download: ML20138N119 (81)

Text

ORIG NA_ -

a UN11ED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION IN THE MAT [ER OF: DOCKET NO:

MEETING WITH NIAGARA MOHAWK POWER CORPORATION TO DISCUSS CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE AND READINESS FOR FUEL LOAD

)

LOCATION: BETHESDA, MARYLAND PAGES: 1 - 61 DATE: MONDAY, NOVEMBER la, 1985 ace-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.

Cfficial .Wcr'ers 444 North Capitol Street Washincton, 'O.C. 20001 0512230376 851213 O (202) 347-3700 PDR ADOCK 0500 NA7:CNWIDE COVERAGE

, , - .----.,..._.m1...,.._. ... . . . . . . . .. _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . - . .

s .

1360 01 01 1

{yrysimons1 UNITED STATES OF.. AMERICA-2 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 3

4 MEETING WITH NIAGARA MOHAWK POWER CORPORATION 5 TO DISCUSS 6 CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE AND READINESS FOR FUEL LOAD 7 --, ,

8 Nuclear Regulatory Commission 9 Conference Room 422

~

10 7920 Norfolk Avenue 11 Bethesda, Maryland

~

12 Monday, November 18, 1985

(.. '

13 The meeting. convened, pursuant to notice, at 14 1:20 p.m.

15 NRC

Participants:

16 M. HAUGHEY 17 H. DENTON

' 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 C 25 ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.

.__ . _ E3347 3700_. _ _ ,_ Nationwide Coverage _ _

800 336 4646 _ _ __

2513 01 01 2 je'arysimons 1 H. THOMPSON x

2 B. BERNARO 3 T. NOVAK 4 W. BUTLER 5 J. LINVILLE 6 W. BUTLER 7 R. SCROGGINS 8 M. VIRGILIO 9 R. GRAMM 10 D. CRUTCHFIELD 11 C. MILLER 12 B. BORDENICK 13 E. WEINKAM 14 S. BLACK -

15 Niagara Mohawk

Participants:

16 W. DONLON 17 B. HOOTEN

18) C. MANGAN

• 19 R. ABBOTT 20 D. QUAMME 21 A. ZALLNICK 22 G. AFFLERBACH 23 24 25 ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.

202 347 3"100 Nationwide Coverage 800 336 4646

4 -ems;% n* w m 2513'01 Ol' 3 A crysimons 1 Also Present:

v:

2 T. CONNER, JR.

3 -

'F. GIACCIO 4 P. EDDY 5 .

> 6 7

8 9

10 11 12

(- 13 14 15 16 17 18 -

19 20 21 22 i 23 24 25 ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.

2n W ?'* _ _ _ *?*"* __

l 2513 01.01 4 gmarysimons 1 PROCEEDINGS s .  !

2 MS. HAUGHEY: My name is Mary Haughey. I am the '

3 Licensing Project Manager for Nine Mile Point 2.

4 We are meeting today to discuss the schedule for

. 5 completion of Nine Mile Point Unit 2 with the corresponding 6 schedules for licensing and inspection activities.

7 These meetings are held whenever there are large 8 differences between the staff's and the applicant's 9 prtjections for the date of plant readiness for fuel load.

10 In keeping with the NRC procedures for this type 11 of meeting, a transcript of our discussions will be made 12 and a copy of the transcript will be placed in the public E 13 document rooms here in Washington, D.C. and in Oswego, New 14 York.

15 Also in keeping with NRC policy, this meeting is 16 open to the public to attend as observers. We note that 17 there are some members of t'he public present today.

18 In order to introduce the participants at this

.- 19 meeting, we will go around the room and I will request that 4

20 each person identify himself or herself and state the 21 organization you represent and your position.

22 Since we have a court recorder here today, please 23 speak up so that she can hear you clearly. I will begin to i

24 circulate an attendance sheet. Members of the public who k-) 25 ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.

202 347 3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 336 4646

m ,

1 I

l 2513 01 01 5 2rysimons 1 are here as observers do not need to sign this attendance 2 sheet.

3 Again, I am Mary Haughey and I am the Licensing 4 Project Manager for Nine Mile Point 2.

- 5 MR. BUTLER: Walt Butler, Chief, Licensing Branch 6 No. 2.

7 MR. QUAMME: Dean Quamme, Project Director for 8 Niagara Mohawk.

9 MR. ABBOTT: Rick Abbott, Station Superintendent, 10 Unit 2.

11 MR. MANGAN: Chuck Mangan, Senior Vice President 12 Nuclear, Niagara Mohawk.

(- 13 MR. DONLON: Bill Donlon, President, Niagara 14 Mohawk. .

15 MR. HOOTEN: Bill Hooten, Executive Director i

16 Nuclear Construction, Niagara Mohawk.

17 MR. CONNER: Troy B. Conner, counsel, Niagara 18 Mohawk. -

'- 19 MR. NOVAK: Tom Novak, Ascistant Director for 20 Licensing, NRC.

i

• j_ 21 MR. SCROGGINS: Ron Scroggins, Controller and

. 22 Director, Office of Resource Management, NRC.

23 MR. THOMPSON: Hugh Thompson, Director of the s

24 Division of Licensing for NRR.

- 25 MR. BERNERO: Bob Bernero, Director of the ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, ING. ,

02-347-3700 Nationwide Coverase 233M646 l

i

'2513 01 01 6 e9nrysimons 1 Division of Systems Integration for NRR.

2 MR. DENTON: Director of NRR.

3 MR. LINVILLE: James Linville, Chief, Reactor

~4 Projects Section 2C, NRC, Region I.

,. 5 MR. GRAMM: Bob Gramm, Senior Resident, Nine Mile 6 2, Region I.

7 MR. VIRGILIO: Marty Virgilio, Group Leader, Tech 8 Spec Review Group, NRR.

9 MR. CRUTCHFIELD: Dennis Crutchfield, Assistant 10 Director of Safety Assessment, NRR.

11 MR. MILLER: Charles Miller, Technical Assistant 12 to.the Assistant Director of C.fety Assessment, NRR.

f 13 MR. GIACCIO: Frank Giaccio, Consultant to the New 14 York Public Service Commission.

15 MR. EDDY: Paul Eddy, Construction Monitoring, New

, 16 York State Public Service Commission.

17 MR. BORDENICK: Bob Bordenick, Office of the 18 Executive Legal Director, NRC.

i . 19 MR. WEINKAM: Ed Weinkam, Technical Assistant to

, 20 the Assistant Director of Licensing, NRR.

1.

21 MS. BLACK: Suzanne Black, Technical Assistant to

, 22 the Director of Licensing, NRR.

23 MR. ZALLNICK: Tony Zallnick, Niagara Mohawk, 24 Nuclear Licensing.

k- 25 MR. AFFLERBACH: Gerry Afflerbach, Niacara Mohawk, ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.

, 202 347 3700 Nationwide Coveraos 2 336 6646

. . . ~ . .. - . . . ... ..

2513.01 01. 7

'.r'7Crysimons 1 Nine Mile 2 Project Manager.

2 MS. HAUGHEY: I have here the agenda that we are 3 planning to follow today.

4 .one thing I1would like to note is we have Mr.

-~ 5 Gramm who name is noticed here. Instead of Mr. Gramm it 6 will be Mr. Linville make the presentation for the Region.

7 We also have some copies of the agenda which I will pass 8 around.

9 At this point I would like to turn the meeting 10 over to Mr. Denton.

11 MR. DENTON: Thank you. We have licensed about 30 12 plants since TMI, and I don' t think we have unnecessarily

, held any of those 30 up, but that.is since we resumed 13 14 licensing in.about 1980.

15 our .cxdy interest in dates, and Hugh will 16 elaborate further on this, is scheduling of our own 17 resources. Wo.are not given by Congress resources to do 18 all plants at once. So it is just a question of priority

• . 19 for us to try to allocate the licensing resources and the 20 inspection resources in,a schedule commensurate with your

.j 21 construction schedule, and it is not our intent to hold you

, 22 up in any way. But I don't want to divert resources to 23 your plant if in fact I know that your schedule won't be 24 met and someone else's schedule will be met.

b 25 The policy the Commission has adopted in this ACE FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.

202 347 3700 Nationwide Coverage 800-336 6646

2513 01 01 8 marysinons 1 area, after several Congressional hearings.on how we should

2 do~ncheduling, is that if we are within six months of.each 3 other on the completion schedule we will work toward your 4 schedule because that is close enough for the intent of.

. 5 what we use it.for.

6 If it gets further apart.than six months, 1

7 Commission policy requires that we meet, such as we are 8 doing today,-to attempt to understand why we are not closer 9 together and to assist the staff in allocating its 10 resources. Of course, the actual completion date is 11 completely under your control and it depends on the 12 resources you apply to it and to some extent what you have l' l'3 with the preoperation startup. test.

14 Hugh, would you like.to add some comments?

15 MR. THOMPSON: Yes. I think you have covered the 16 basic background very well, Harold.

17 The one thing I guess, and specifically with

_18 respect to Nine Mile Point 2, one of the key elements we

.- 19 need to decide today is in fact the completion date for our s

20 review of the proof and review copy of tech specs, and also

, 21 if indeed that completion date is beyond February 24th, we t

4 22 have to decide specifically how that is reflected in the 23 Bevil report to Congress as to whether our licensing review 24 in fact results in an impacted or delay in your own kI 25 licensing activities.

ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.

202-347 3700 Nationwide Coversee 800 336 4646

. x_.. _ ~ _ _ _ . _ _ . - . - _ .n .. _ _ , _ - _ ;___,_ _.._ _ ___ _._ _ . __, _ _ . _ _ - - . _ .

W,x . . = .

J 2513 01 01 9 2';marysimons 1 Those are I think the key factors we need to 2 ' decide and that we need to keep on schedule so that we can 3 get Mr. Denton's position. What we would like to do is 4 hear from the case load forecast panel, what their basis is

%' 5 for their late 1986 construction. completion date, then have 6 your presentation, some discussion between the two groups

-7 and then a proposal by the licensing staff as to what they 8 would propose as a course of action and then hear from you 9 as to what you believe is the course of action that Mr.

10 Denton should direct.

11 MR. CONNER: Hugh, can I ask a clarifying 12 question?

b 13 MR. THOMPSON: Yes.

14 MR. CONNER: It is not clear I think in

,q 15 everybody's mind, and certainly not in mine, as I

=

16 understand it, the tech specs have generally been 17 circulated, discussed and so forth prior to the proof and

'; 18 review copy. It has been reviewed by the Tech Spec Branch, a

- 19 but has not sent to the Technical Branches for final

)

20 review. Am I correct in that? And that is the holdup from i 21 my viewpoint.

1 4- 22 MR. THOMPSON: The status is that we are prepared, 23 and we have developed a revised set of tech specs which 24 reflects what we believe the FSAR is today that is in-

/ 25 house, and we are prepared to send that out in the proof ACE FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.

202 347 3700 Nasionwide Coversee 800 336 6646

2513 01 01 10

,Learysimons 1 and review stage.

2 The major question is when is the response due 3 date for that review. Typically that will be a one-month 4 type of review date. I think we can ge_t into more details

. 5 of what we would like to propose af ter everybody hears your 6 position as to where you are in the construction as well as 7 to hear from the case load forecast panel.

8 MR. DENTON: One other twist on that, too, Troy, 9 is we could have sent out tech specs three years ago, but 10 in order to conserve our resources we want to be sure we 11 have what is your-final application so that when we do a 12 proof and review that we don't then get hundreds of pages I 13 of changes the next month which means we have to recycle 14 -

the thing. ,

15 This is a problem we found in other cases. It 16 might not be a problem in yours, but it is what has led to 17 our basis for scheduling which ic mainly to have a complete 18 final application before starting down the tech spec road l

, ,.. 19 so that we can go through it one time and then not have to 20 face changes in the application.

21 MR. CONNER: Harold, let me ask one more 22 clarifying question that I didn',t understand again. The 23 reorganization is really not in place yet. So there is no 24 dichotomy between boilces and PWR review of tech specs, and k_- 25 sort of the same people are doing both still. Am I right ACE. FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.

ll02 347 3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 336 4 646

2513 01 01 11 73rysimons 1 on that or wrong?

2 MR. DENTON: That is right, but I think if we are 3 going to get to the meat of the debate then we had better 4 move ahead.

• 5 MR. NOVAK: I think the only point I would add is 6 you are generally correct, up until this point in time the 7 lead engineer who has been handling your tech specs has 8 worked as the need arises with certain specific technical 9 branches within NRR. But at this point in time when we 10 would send the proof and review copy back to the NRR staff 11 it would be fpr a total review of that document versus the 12 FSAR as to the in-house status.

I 13 MR. DENTON: And it would probably go into Bob 14 Bernero's divisfon, who will be the head of the boiling 15 water group, and that is why he is here today.

16 MR. THOMPSON: 'Right. The proof and review will 17 be sent to the region, to yourself and to the reviewers.

18 MR. DENTON: Onward. Fifteen minutes, Walt.

19 MR. BUTLER: I will try to do it in less.

20 (Slide.)

21 What I will do is give you a cursory summary of 22 the case load forecast panel review for Nine Mile, Poi,nt 2.

23 The panel members, or the panel was constituted of 24 Al Schwoncer, who previously was chief of the position that

(- -

I am in now, Mary Haughey, the Project Manager, Dick 25 ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.

~

i. 202-347 3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 336 6646

2513 01 01 12

, morysimons 1 Hartfield, who comes from the NRC's Resource Management 2 Branch, Bob Gramm, the Senior Resident at Nine Mile 2 and 3 Tony Carne from_Seabrook.

4 The activities cf the forecast panel are listed 5 there. It started out with its first meeting in February 6 of '83. At that time Mr. Lovelace was part of the panel.

7 And their findings in '83 were that the fuel load date was 8 projected around late 1986.

9 A second meeting was held on this occasion with 10 Hartfield taking Mr. Lovelace's place in October of 1984.

11 At that point in time the Niagara Mohawk people were 12 changing over and bringing on some people from MAC,, and the I 13 people decided not to make its findings at that point, but 14 rather to defer until around June

• to see whether the 15 changeover of people wil.1 in some fashion improve the 16 schedule.

17 The meeting was held in June and the findings of 18 the June meeting were consistent with the initial panel 19 meeting, that is the forecast fuel load date was still late 20 1986.

21 (Slide.)]

22 The bases for that finding, what the panel does is 23 go into a large number of elements that go into forecast of 24l the fuel load date.

1

\- 25' Among the things they look at is the number of o

e ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.

. _ _ _ _ "]:'"- _

"*"*"*'** . . ?'"

1 2513 01 01 13 7-marysimons 1 months from the date that the cold hydro is performed until 2 fuel load. We have examined that kind of parameter for 3 about a dozen plants and find that on the average it is

,4 around la or 19 months.

5 We examined the circumstances that surround the 6 conduct of the cold hydro, how far along has the plant come 7 at the time tnat the cold hydro is conducted.

8 Then subsequent to that we examined progress 9 relative to the commodities, the large and amall bore 10 piping, terminations, electrical terminations, building 11 turnovers, system turnovers, pre-op testing, progress on 12 surveillance testing and the development of procedures.

b 13 After reviewing, not only the accomplishment at 14 that point in time, but reviewing also the slope or' the 15 rate of change of those parameters, the panel makes a 16 judgment as to what the expected fuel load date should be.

17 (Slide.)

18 Here is some of the backup information that leads 19 us to our finding of nominally 18 or 19 months en the 20 average.

21 MR. DENTON: Walt, can I just clarify something?

22 MR. BUTLER: Yes.

23 MR. DENTON: Therefore we look at past practice, 24 and to the extent that reflects real life, that is what we

- 25 are projecting, right? If other utilities had difficulties ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.

202 347.nco Naionwide coverase _ _

800 336 6646 l

2513 01 01 14

,, ccrysimons 1 or a test'had to be repeated several times, that is built 2 -inte with data?

3 MR. BUTLER: That is correct.

4 MR. DENTON: So when we talk about what is

. 5 projected here, it is if they perform like the average 6 comparable plant has done in the past?

7 MR. BUTLER: That is correct. It is pretty much 8 empirical. If they do better, they indeed can improve on 9 that schedule.

I We found that the second unit at a site 10 11 experiences a somewhat better schedule because they don' t 12 run into the kinds of problems the first unit encountered.

( 13 (Slide.)

14 Ancther chart that is indicative of the progress 15 here is a comparison of Nina Mile 2 with the progress on 16 Hope Creek.

17 Hope Creek is a similar plant. There are some 18 minor differences. It is G BWR-4 and not a 5 and it is a

. 19 Mark I and not Mark 2. But if you take a look at the 20 number of pre-op test procedures that are needed, it is 149 21 versus 106 needed, and progress to date is shown in the 22 numbers there.

23 You will find that for Nine Mile 2 results 24 reviewed by t'he review committee, the site operating review

('- 25 committee, is pretty near aero as of November lith.

ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.

I 202-347 3700- Nationwide Covrage 800 336 6646

~. . _ _ . ._ __ ___ _ _ _ _

2513 01 01 15 ,

narysimons 1 MR. NOVAK: And, Walt, you might point out that 2 that plant was chosen because it also was forecasting '86.  ;

3 MR. BUTLER: Yes. The utility's date to date has 4 been December 1 of '85. However, they are telling us that 5 they are going to officially. write us of a slip to January

. 6 15th. But our regional inspectors judge that plant to be a 7 March plant. So it is nominally a time frame of February 8 of '86, and we see much greater progress at Hope Creek than 9 we see at Nine Mile 2 re}:tive to completion of February of 10 '86.

11 (Slide.)

12 The last viewgraph I have here is an examination

(- 13 of some of the elements' that go into the critical path 14 method of analysis on plant progress.

15 We just took a look at a couple of elements 4 16 wherein the scheduled completion date is in the recent 17 past. Now I recognize that solid rad waste is not an 18 important system for fuel load. It is something that can

$- 19 reasonably be deferred, but the utility has this for L 20 completion around the end of October. And we find that as l' .

l 21 of this point in time they have not completed the j 22 preliminary testing on the solid rad waste system.

I 23 A.second activity in the utility's critical path

( 24 method of analysis is the reactor protection system. The

. (is 25 construction release was scheduled for November 7, and as 1

l 't I .

[

. ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.

. 202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 336 6646 l - ,

9 2513 01 01 16 ccrysimons 1 of this point in time it has not been released. So we see 2 nominally a week or two of further delay.

3 The utility has reported around 13 weeks of 4 negativity in their schedule. In other words, they have a

. 5 negative float relative to a February 24 date of some 13 6 weeks.

7 When you add those up, you find that the utility's 8 present date if they don' t improve on their schedule, is 9 late May 1986.

10 MR. THOMPSON: Walt, would you again tell me 11 exactly what these two activ'ities were selected from? This 12 was that the case load forecast panel did what? Can you

( 13 tie that back to what the case load forecast panel is 14 doing?

15 MR. BUTLER: Yes. This was two pieces of data 16 taken from a critical path method of analysis that was 17 furnished by the utility of those activities that needed to 18 get done by fuel load. And we took a snapshot of a couple

. 19 of activities that are in the present time frame of late 20 October or early November just to see how the utility is 21 meeting its target milestones. That is with respect to

., 22 these two activities, we find that the utility is beg 43ning 23 to slip a week or two beyond what they had targeted as 24 recently as October of '84.

, (_I 25 MS. HAUGHEY: I think this is actually September.

ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.

202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 900 336 4646

q . =. . . .

i 2513 01 01 17

.carysimons 1 MR. BUTLER: September, okay.

~

2 So at that point I would like to turn it over to 3, the utility for around a 15-minute response, and then we 4 will follow that with a recommended course of action first

. 5 by myself and then by the utility as to where do we go from 6 here..

7 MR. DENTON: And let me preface before you'begin 8 by saying we sure don' t want a delay. You know, that is 9 not our intent. It is to assign resources that keep us off 10 the critical path. And there have been one or two 11 instances in the past where we have been wrong and we have 12 had to.really plow resources into that case in order to 13 avoid delays and we are willing to .do that.

14 So our responsibility-is to meet your realistic 15 date, and I think your responsibility is to put on the

.16 table a realistic date so that I don' t turn my schedules 17 topsy-turvy and then find that it take you much, much 18 longer than had been anticipated so that I in effect put

.. -19 resources on yours instead of putting them on some other 20 vital Commission activity.

21 MR. DONLON: We do understand what you are saying, 22 Mr. Denton, and as you will hear in our presentation, we do

23 not agree with the conclusion that has just been outlined 24 and perhaps even with some of the process in arriving at

.' (_) 25 that conclusion as far as the case load forecast panel is y

ACE. FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.

j. - - , . . ,

202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 336 6646

2513 01 01 18 c rysimons 1 concerned.

2 In fact, we look upon our fuel load date and our 3 schedule as we look down the road as possibly being 4 . impacted upon right now insofar as the tech specs not being

. 5 released for proof and review.

6 We think we have a number of differences between 7 what could be called the average plant and we will discuss 8 what those are. Eighteen months from cold hydro in our 9 case to fuel load, we do not see that time all being 10 necessary.

11 With that, I will turn it over to Dean Quamme and 12 Dick Abbott.

(- 13 MR. QUAMME: I want to use just about a half a 14 dozen slides', if I may, and these are typical of what we 15 utilize in our project review meetings. I didn' t make up 16 anything special for this meeting.

17 (Slide.)

18 This gives you a snapshot as of 11/13 of where we

. 19 stood on progress. We were reporting ourselves at about 94 20 percent complete against a 97 planned, and significantly 21 here in the period, that is the accounting month of 22 November, we earned 1.33 percent against a .72 planned.

23 (Slide.)

24 We are on a trend that is upwards as far as i 25 recovery of reported schedule losses are concerned, and in i

ACE. FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.

202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 336 6646

2513 01 01 19

.mcrysimons 1 a curve standpoint it looks like this, with this being data 2 as of the 13th of November.

3 MR. DENTON: I didn't really follow that.

4 MR. QUAMME: I am sorry about that. .

+ 5 MR. DENTON: You said recovery of ---

6 MR. QUAMME: Well, this is a plan curve across the 7 top. This was the curve that was generated in January of 8 1985 and we fell behind that curve. We developed our 9 . earning rules in January of '85 and started measuring 10 ourselves against those earning rules and this was our 11 actual progress or has been through sort of the calendar 12 year and actually since ---

, [ 13 MR. DENTON: Walt said that you were scheduling 14 then ja:s if you were going to pick' up 12 or 15 months. Does 15 .that mean that you expect your completion curve to pass the 16 solid line?

17 MR. QUAMME: Pardon me? I d id n ' t ---

18 MR. DENTON: Are you going to gain 12 or 15 months

~. 19 on your plan schedules?

20 MR. QUAMME: You mean weeks?

21 MR. DENTON: Weeks, I am sorry. Yes, weeks.

22 MR. QUAMME: I think we have every indication that 23, we can do that if we trend this on up. We are looking at a 24 January / February point in time when we catch up with the

(, 25 plan.

ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.

202 347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 336 4646

I 4

2513 01 01 20 l l

.marysimons--l I think, you know, we can talk a lot about percent .

l 2 complete. Every utility and every construction site l l

3 develops their own earning rules and a percent complete 4 weans'something different to just about every other utility 5 who is in this kind of a-business.

6 I think from my perspective I would like to leave 7 you with one message, and that is when we say it is done, 8 it is done. We don' t claim total completion of any 9 activity,until in fact all of the paperwork that is 10 ' associated with that activity that is required ~for permit 11 holding is in fact reviewed, accepted and in the vault.

12 So we are including in our percent complete 13 calculations the paperwork that goes with the activity.

14 MR. THOMPSON: Would that incl ude surveillance 15 procedures being developed and validated for a system?

<- 16 MR. QUAMME: Yes.

17 MR. ABBOTT: What we are doing now is developing 18 our surveillance procedures in conjunction with pre-ops.

- 19 So that, yes, at the end of a pre-op test and acceptance by 20 sort for a given system we will also have run, or we will '

21 intend to run surveillance procedures and proof tests.

22 MR. DENTON: When you say turned over to 23 operations, what is the average number of open items that 24 go with it?

k.? 25 MR. QUAMME: We have been running at the turnover, ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.

• • • mm

_ _ .P.w.co - _

E l

2513 01 01 21 l merysimons 1 and this is what we call the startup test report at the )

2 completion of preliminary testing.

3 The turnover for the initial. initiation of the pre-4 op or acceptance test, our open items have been averaging

• 5 less than 100 per system, the majority of which are 6 software, which are inspection reports that need to be 7 closed or an engineering change paper that needs to be 8 incor'porated.

9 We are running right now somewhere around 4,000 10 open items on turned-over systems and we have about 50 11 systems turned over, in that neighborhood.

4 12 -( Slide . ) -

13 I think I would rather concentrate, as opposed to 14 project for saying complete, on trends of what we have been 15 doing. This chart indicates the four.different steps that 16 we take, this being the completion in construction of l'7 testable subsystems and this being those testable 18 subsystems that make up a total system.

- 19 You will note we broke the plant up into actually 20 360 testabl'e subsystems. Those comprised a total of 108 c5 21 systems for test. That is the 100 percent completion point i 22 on this line.

23 The turnover is the STR that I talked about, the 24 startup test report where the system has been depunched and s 25 the software and open items have been worked down to an ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.

202-347-3700 Nauomnde Coverage 800 336-6646

l 2513 01 01 22 norysimons 1 acceptable level, one that we can test from without any 2 fear.of having to retest as a result of a closure of an 3 open item, and of course the last line being the actual 4 conduct of the pre-op or acceptance test. There are 137 5 tests total required.

6 As of the end of the November reporting period we 7 had 351 of the 362 testable subsystems construction 8 complete turned over into the startuo people's hands for 9 preliminary test. We had 106, and that should be 106 as 10 opposed to 91,106 of the 108 systems that were completed 11 out of the hands of construction and into the hands of the 12 test group for preliminary testing. ,

/

13 On turnovers at the time that this particular data 14 was put together we were at 48. We had intended 62, and we 15 are somewhere in excess of 50, and that is changing on an 16 hour-by-hour basis. But we are in this range on turnovers.

17 On pre-op tests Gerry has in excess of 40 tests 18 that are now either currently in process that are under 19 review for completed data or they have in fact been 20 completed. So 40 roughly of the 137 tests as of today have 21 either started or have been completed.

. 22 (Slide.)

23 Looking at this in a different manner in just 24 plain bar charts, and this again is data that was a little k .- 25 bit old. But this now is colored up to this point. This i

l ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.

j ll02-347 3700 Nationwide Coverage 800-3364646

2513 01 01 23

. tarysimons 1- is colored up to this point, that is activities completed.

(

2 System turnovers are in this range. Building turnovers, we 3 are at 10 out of a total of 30. And system tests, we are 4 in excess of 40 either-in process or completed. Obviously

- 5 the object is to color all these lines black.

6 (Slide.)

7 The paper that goes with turnovers ---

8 MR. THOMPSON: How many have you completed out of 9 that 40?

10 MR. AFFLERBACH: Well, actually completed and 11 reviewed, and we have two review processes, the joint test 12 group and then SORC, we are talking about 15.

I 13 MR. THOMPSON: Fifteen that have been through the 14 quality review process.

15 MR. AFFLERBACH: No, they haven' t been through 16 SORC. None have been through SORC.

17 MR. THOMPSON: Okay, but 15 have been through the 18 joint test group.

e 19 MR. QUAMME: Right.

20 MR. AFFLERBACH: Fifteen as of this coming 21 Wednesday because L have two that are on schedule for this 22 Wednesday and they will make it through.

23 MR. QUAMME: If I look at these whole systems by 24 system number and designator, this is what we looked like

(_ 25 when we move from left to right.

l l

l ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.

l22-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800-33(H5646

2513 01-01 24

~ ecrysimons 1 This column is indicative of those systems that

, ,m 2 still have pieces of them remaining in construction. We 3 have now as of today only two systems out of the entire 4 plant left in construction.

5 Post-construction completion is that activity that 6 is initiated under the guidance of Gerry Afflerbach and 7 schedule control of him to depunch the systems when they 8 come over ,on an "A" release, as we call it, a prelLminary 9 release that comes with a punch list. This activity 10 results in the depunching of those systems, both hardware 11 and software.

12 These two columns indicate our administrative

.f 13 turnover process where the reviews are taking place and 14 agreements by everyone that punch list items.that are open

-15 are acceptable or need to be' closed.

16 And, lastly, this. column indicates these systems 17 that are ready to be scheduled for pre-operational or 18 acceptance tests, and this column indicates those systems 19 that are currently under test or complete.

20 So you can see we are moving the plant very l

21 rapidly. If you looked at the trend lines before, we are

! 22 moving very rapidly out of the construction phase and into

!- 23 the pure depunching and preoperational acceptance test

( 24 phase.

l 25 (Slide.)

l n

i

- ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.

202-347 3700 Nationwide Coverage 800-336-6646

[

M

- 2513 01 01 25 Jccrysimons 1 The records that go with these systems, we have an 2 overall goal to have 85 percent of our plant required 3 records-in the vault at fuel load in February of '86. That

. 4 consists of course of generic records, administrative 3 5 records and system records, and also obviously we have 100 6 percent of the system related records vaulted at the time 7 of fuel load.

8 As of the end of this reporting period we were 61 9 percent overall complete on records and 60 percent of the 1 .

10 system records were vaulted. So we are progressing with 11 the records review, approval, acceptance and vaultir.g 12 consistent with the turnover schedules and the support of

/ 13 Gerry Afflerbach's test program.

14 MR6 DENTON: What is going on inside of the 15 containment? Do they still have scaffolding tip? ,

16 MR. QUAMME:- Yes. In containment we are 17 completing the final electrical work in containment, we 18 have painting going on in containment and that is basically

. 19 it. There is, you know, a little depunching work going on 20 on some of the hangers and whip restraints, but other than

~21 that basic construction is essentially completed.

22 MR._DENTON: What about your plans to actually 1

23 complete the facility prior to asking for a license?

24 MR. QUAMME: Are you referring to the potential of

(,, 25 asking for a deferral of certain things?

ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.

312 347 3700 Nationwide coverase 800 336 6646

~

2513 01 0l 26 acrysimons 1 MR. DENTON: Yes.

(n

\

2 MR. QUAMME: Our intent is to ask for the defterral 3 of nothing. Our plan includes the completion of the plant, 4 recognizing that punch lists will carry on beyond fuel load s 5 that will require completion as we progress on through 6 towards commercial operation or even beyond. I would 7 anticipate a substantial amount of painting that would 8 remain after fuel-load, and there would be some penetration 9 seals that will have to be put in.

i 10 MR. DENTON: I think the idea of completing the 11 plant is a good one. Another plant in your region, 12 Susquehanna, took the same sort of approach as to not try 13 to do construction in the balance of plant area and plant

[~

14 . operation at the same time, and that tends to really slow 15 down that book operation, but I am glad to hear that you

~16 are going to really complete the plant.

17 MR. QUAMME: That is right, yes. Very honestly, 18 we have looked at that and we have said let's identify some

. 19 potentials out there and see what we can do, but always 20 when we looked at it we said is it truly an advantage to us 21 or does it merely put the burden on the power ascension 22 test program, and in most cases we find it puts the burden 23 on the power ascension test program. So our decision has 24 been to continue pushing on construction to complete and on 3j 25 varied tests, and that today is what our current plan calls ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.

P A E F- E D NM J Gh32M*3

. . ~. .- - . ..

2513 01 01 27 ccrysimons 1 for.

^ 2 (Slide.)

3 Milestones. Reference has been made to our

.4 project critical path schedule. We have identified the 4

. 5 following dates as milestone dates as a result of a recent 6 reanalysis of our Project 2 schedule.

7 We had cast that Project 2 schedule last summer e 8 and used it for priinarily two purposes. One was-to make .

9 sure that Gerry's test program was sequenced properly to 110 .give us the best fuel load date, but more importantly to 5.

11 drive construction to completion as far as getting work out 12 of them into the hands of Gerry so that he could test it.

/ 13 Wo.had a logic that was defined that had those two n ' '

14 goals in mind. One was to force plant completion and the 15 other to give Gerry systems in the right order.

16 We have now relooked at that in light of where we 17 are today and we have mentioned a couple of milestones that 18 we missed, and that is'true, we did, and our new demand

. 19 -schedule that still shows 24 February as a fuel load date 20 shows these dates as now milestones.

21 And you will-note, for those of you who are 22 familiar, that as an example the loss-of-power test has 23 slipped from the 7th of November or early November until 24 mid-January. This still fits the overall logic of the test

(. 25 program that would allow a fuel update as early as f

ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.

4

_ _ . _ - . _ NE 3IM _ _ Natim@ Cowage _ , _ M3M . _ _ ,

2513 01 01 28 Encrysimons 1 February.

2 MR. THOMPSON: Is there any negative aspect of 3 that schedule at this time?

4 MR. QUAMME: I mentioned this is a demand 5 schedule. We are close enough in running it front to back I

6 that we still felt that we were comfortable with issuing a i

7 demand schedule that indicated what people had to do in 8 order to support that fuel load date.

9 The negativity if we ran it front to back on a 10 worst cases basis right now would show a mid-May fuel load i

11 date. That is the worst case ~ on the system testing basis.

12 There is still potential for improvement in that 13 schedule. From a scheduling stanrpoint we as utility

{ ,

- 14 people have got to. force these plants to completion as 15 early as we can. There are possibilities to improve upon 16 the mid-May and we are going to continue to push the site 17 and our test people to the earliest fuel load date that we 18 possibly can.

19 Yes, sir.

L -

20 MR. BERNERO: Is it fair to say that February 24th 21 is the earliest achievable date and May 24th is what you 22 are saying is the worst case latest achievable date?

23 MR. QUAMME: Well, you know, that is from the

, 24 basis of this schedule analysis. Obviously we don't have

, 25 ,

room in here for the failure of a recire pump or these i e ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.

202-347 3700 Nationwide Coverage 800-33(Hi646

2513-01 01 29 carysimons 1 kinds of things. But if the tests progress in the manner 2 that we now have them scheduled and we don't have major 4

3 problems, your c'haracterization of the schedule is 4 accurate.

5 MR. THOMPSON: Well, wo'uld you say you have any 6 contingency in the plan right now for any problems in the

^

7 May date?

8 MR. QUAMME: Well, you know, you always have 9 potential to look at work.around for specific pieces of 10 equipment that don't start upright. We still have that.

11 MR. DENTON: How long has the plant been under 12 construction?

13

{ MR. QUAMME: Bill, I will let you answer that.

14 MR. DONLON: Well,~we actually broke ground in-15 1975 and we stopped on two occasions which was 1979.

16 MR. QUAMME: I think it is interesting that the 17 schedule that we are working on today that shows the 2/24 18 fuel load date was actually put on paper in June of 1981.

19 The milestones that we look at up here for this 20 energization of the main electrical system, the integrated

~

21 flush and hydro, were accomplished against dates that were 22 established in 1981.

23 MR. DENTON: I was thinking of the River Bend 24 case. I think that after they had done the site 25 preparation it took them like six and a half yaars and they ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.

202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 336 6646

2513 01 01 30 cgrysimons I had a. number of unique features such as union agreements 2 and other attempts to expedite the schedule. .

l 3 (Slide.)

4 MR. QUAMME: The last slide that I have is at the

, 5 request of the region. We have responded to -- and this 6 may be too small to actually read -- their request in 7 providing schedule information against key activities that 8 they will look at in their assesament of readiness for fuel 9 load and our dates that we have given them.when we will be 10 ready to sustain an audit in such things as the operations, 11 maintenance and surveillance area, staff training, 12 procedure preparation, et cetera, fire protection system, 13 procedures, training and equipment, radiological controls,

{

14 security and safeguards, quality assurance and 15 preoperational testing.

~

16 The milestone dates that we have committad to the 17 region still are supportive of_an early February date.

18 These activities, we still start withstanding audits I am

. 19 sure from the region or others as early as December of this 20 year and go on through the February time frame.

21 (Slide.)

22 One last slide on general audits from my 23 perspective. This gives a graphic illustration of some of 24 the more important audits as we saw them and the current 25 status of those audits.

m ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.

' 202 347 3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 336 6646 _ _ _ _ _ _

2513 01 01 ,

31

, _ccrysimons 1 We have been through Appendix R. We are 2 anticipating in December equipment qualification, tech 3 specs status, TMI issues and the NDE van visit. We are 4 preparing for each of those and will be ready for those

. 5 when those come forward.

6 With that, unless,there are questions, I will sit 7 down and let Dick Abbott speak for a few moments.

I 8 MR. ABBOTT: There is just one comment I would 9 like to add.about the JTG and SORC reviews that may be a 10 little different from Hope Creek in that we have ov.s 11 representation on the Joint Test Group both for the review 12 of the procedure and results. So that when JTG does review (F ', 13 pre-op test results, they will have also have a SORC r,

14 representative in that same capacity, and when it gets to 15 SORC then I don't anticipate really any problems with the 16 results of pre-op tests as far as the SORC Committee goes.

17 I just want to make a couple of points on tech 18 specs. Obviously I would like to see the tech specs

. 19 finalized as soon as I can so that I can get them in the l 20 hands of my operating people and my technical staff people 21 and various supervision in the nuclear generation 22 organization sa that we can enable everyone to thoroughly

. 23 understand the content, that we can live by the tech, specs 24 right from the word go when we start our startup test i 25 program and load fuel.

i -

j. ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.

202-347-3700 Nati]nwide Coverage C 336 6646

l 2513 01 01- 32 l

carysimons 1 I think the more time we have to train our people 2 and to become familiar with our tech specs, I think the i 3 better off we are going to be from both a safety and an 4 ef ficiency standpoint, 'and frankly I think the better off

.. 5 your region people may be. They will have the opportunity 6 to thoroughly study and understand I think our Nine Mile 2 7 tech specs.

8 I mentioned that we are developing our 9 surveillance procedures in conjunction with pre-op tests.

10 ' I think the- sooner we have ' finalized the surveillance 11 requirements and our tech specs the sooner I can get those 12 procedures finalized and proof test them again-for both

(* 13 safety and efficiency's sake when we start our fuel lead 14 and our policy program.

15 MR. DENTON: -Are you ready to certify that the

. 16 tech specs' match the plant and the plant matches the l' 17 ' application and be inspected on that basis?

cf 18 MR. ABBOTT: I really can't certify the tech specs

. 19 yet until I get them back in a final state.

i, 20 (Laughter.)

i.

i 21 MR. DENTON: Well, obviously, but I mean if we 22 send them out based based on today's application. We have

~

J- :23 had cases where after we go through the proof and review 24 and review and everybody does all the arduous work then s,

25 there are a lot of changes made later. So it depends on 1

ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.

i 800 336 6646

. _ _ _ _ _ _ _. _._ _ . M9h3R _ Nationwide coverase , , _ _ _

~

1 2513 01 01 33 c.rysimons 1 whether you are licensing the state of.the plant in terms 2 of final application and do we have an application that is

[- 3 really the final application so we can get it through.- No 4 one wants to hold up the tech specs obviously. It is just

,, 5 the question of doing it one time.

~

6 MR. ABBOTT: We still have amendments to turn in .

.' 7 on the FSAR, but as far as potential changes, we don't see 8 anything looming out there as far as design changes and 9 things like that. It is always possible ---

10 MR. DENTON: Do you have any estimate of how many 11 more pages of changes you are going to file?

12 MR. DONLON: Tony, do you have those open items?

13 MR. ZALLNICK: We did an estimate and we looked at

( -

14- somewhere between two to five percent of the numbers that 15 may change, and those probably will be decided in the next 16 couple of months through-a proof and review process. There 17 are things, for example, like what starting pressure to put 18 down in the diesel generator air receiver tank. We have 19 to run a test to come up with that number and that will be 20 ru.1 in the next couple of months and we will have that i 21 number.

22 Those are the types of numbers that I see in the 23 two to five percent that we need to fill in in the next 24 couple of months.

25 MR. DONLON: And we have scratched our brain on

~

l ,

- ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.

ll02 347 3700 Nationwide Coverage M33HM6

=- _

2513 01 01 34 anrysimons 1 the project to try to identify if there were potential 2 engineering changes out there that would have to impact to

3. tech specs in the overall license and collectively we 4

couldn't come up with any. The engineering is at that

'5 stage where we are doing final stress reconciliation and 6 beating the final equipment quals to death, and in general i'

7 it is in support of construction and the test mode, and 8 basic engineering is out.

9 MR. THOMPSON: One of the things I understand, and 10 correct me if I am wrong, that you have underway is kind of 11 a validation of the FSAR compared to the as-built. When 12 will that process be completed such that the PSAR'that the 13 proof and review copy is either benchmarked against or will

(

l 14 not be'able to be benchmarked? Can you give me a feel for 15 where y6u are on that, like December 24th.

16 MR. ABBOTT: Well, it is the end o'f the year, the 17 end of December, 18 MR. THOMPSON: The end of December. So that would

'i

!.. 19 be when, as you would see it, the FSAR then would be as

, 20 close as you could get it today to match the plant as 21 built.

22 MR. DENTON: I am sure you are aware of the ---

23 MR. ZALLNICK: The verification has been going on 24 for almost a year, and at the present time they have-found

(. 25 that the FSAR is 95 percent accurate and they have a five -

ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.

202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 336 6646

2513 01 01 35 ncrysimons 1 percent. error rate. Three percent is what they call 2 editorial, which is the reference to the wrong figure or 3 the reference to the wrong table for two different numbers, 4 and that is the verification effort to date which is close

. 5 to being done. So they are finding a very low error rate 6 in the FSAR..

7 MR. DENTON: I think our intent would be to avoid 8 the Grand Gulf type situation where they called for many, 9 many. changes after the original license had been issued and 10 then the recriminations that flowed back from that as to 11 why that happened. I would like to have a set of tech 12 specs that fully matches the application and the plant 13 before we proceed with licensing.

(~

14 MR. ABBOTT: One more point. We are right now 15 developing our surveillance schedule and computerizing and 16 cross-referencing the surveillance test requirements with 17 LCO's and again that is a considerably amount of work'that

. 18 . we are going to have to do. And the more final our

. 19 surveillance requirements are and the more Linal the LCO's 20 are, obviously it provide for a better work product and as 21 early as possible.

l2:2 MR. DENTON: Walt, you had a proposal to make and 23 then maybe you have one and we will talk about it and have 24 a meeting of the minds.

25 MR. BUTLER: I don't know how much time we have. -

.:s ACE. FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.

202 347 3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 336 6646

~ s 2513 01 01 36 carysimons 1 E was hoping to break it into two parts, one where I 2 described the residual work to be done and then with a 3 recommended course-of action. Do you want me to pass up 4 the residual work to be done?

. 5 MR. THOMPSON: Well, if you can go through it 6 quickly, I think we will have a better feel for it.

7 MR. BUTLER: You want me to go through it 8 quickly? All right.

9 (Slide.)

10 The residual work to be done for Nine Mile 2 11 includes resolution of SER open and confirmatory issues.

12 At the time the SER was issued there were 18 open

_l 13 and 55 confirmatories. At this point in time the 14 corresponding numbers are 9 and 37 which await applicant's 15 submittal of information.

16 The tech specs clearly, as indicated earlier, all

]

., 17 parties would like to see it issued and we all need it for 18 our ongoing work. But we want good tech specs to work

'j. 19 with. For regional activities I have a better viewgraph 20 that indicates that coming up after this one.

4 i

21 (Slide.)

22 Right here is a summary comparison of Nine Mile,

[

23 Hope Creek and Clinton, which are three plants that are at 24 about the same status of construction.

25 In terms of the confirmatory items which tend to ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.

202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800-33(H5646

.2513 01 01 37 m2rysimons 1 have a greater impact on plant schedules, you will see that i 2 the Hope Creek and Clinton stations have substantially 3 -fewer confirmatories and will be ready for those when those 4 come forward.

.- 5 With that, unless there are questions, I will sit 6 down and let Dick Abbott speak for a few moments.

7 MR. ABBOTT: There is just one comment I'would 8 like to add about the JTG and SORC reviews that may be a 9 little different from Hope Creek in th'at we have SORC 10 representation on the Joint Test Group both for the review 11 of the procedure and results. So that when JTG does review 12 pre-op test results,;they will have also have a SORC 13 representative say forget the case load forecast panel's

. 14 date,and forget the utility's date, that is the published 1

- 15 date or the target date, and let's look at something _

?!

l 16 realistic. .

17 /)/e. &f les : The first bullet, staff should work with a May '86 1

18 date for the estimated fuel load date and schedule its

, 19 licensing and inspection activities with that end date-in

'4 20 mind.  ?

i 21 As the time goes on, in the. time frame of 22 December / January we will take another look at the schedule 23 and see whether we should hang on to this schedule.

24 Bullet two, the staff should begin th'is week, the

,' 25 v

ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.

Nationwide Coverage _ _ ~_800

_ _336 6646. _ . ,

_ _ _ 202-_347 3709- -__ _

i

, 2513 01 01 38 corysimons 1 end of this week with the proof and review cycle for the 2 te.c'hnical specifications. We are prepared to issue the 3 specs, and we propose to issue it on Friday, requesting 4 comments back by January the 24th.

. 5 However, consistent with that, we need for the

. s 6 utility to file its final large amendment to the FSAR by 7 around Christmas Eve. That will give us a month or so in

, 8 which to review the proof and review tech specs against the 9 final version of the FSAR. .

10 We would look tewards completion of the proof and 11 review cycle in the time frame of late February or early 12 April. The specific date to be adjusted based on the re-

, ( 13 evaluation that will take place is in the time frame of

,g 14 January of '86.

15 Finally, we ask that the applicant keep the 16 regional of fice apprised of its progress on startup testing 17 so that the regional people can schedule its inspection

~~'

> , 18 resources consistent with the needs of the plant.

19 That is what we have as a recommended action, and 20 ! I don't think it calls for any particular resolution of a 21 date for the forecast panel.

22 I would entertain a presentation by the utility on 23 alternatives.

24 MR. THOMPSON: Can you clarify one point here. We

', 25 talk about completion of the proof and review cycle will ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.

202 347-3700 Nationwide Coverase 800-336 4646

2513 01 01 39 corysimons 1 occur between the 24th of February and the 4th of April 2 time frame . What does that ultimately mean with respect to 3 fuel load? What does that tell you, the earliest that that 4 would say fuel load would be and what would be the latest?

. 5 MR. BUTLER: If we were to complete the proof and 1

6 review cycle on April 4th, it means that that is' consistent 7 with a tech spec being ready for fuel load by about the 8 24th of May.

9 If we, on the other hand, accelerate that schedule 10 to a time frame of late February, that means that we can 11 accommodate a fuel load date around five weeks earlier or 12 mid April.

13 MR. DOtLON: Why does it take a month and a half

{

14 between the completion of that and the issuance of the low-15 power license?

16 MR. THOMPSON: Marty, you might want to provide an 17 answer.

18 MR. VIRGILIO: What we then do is go back to the

- . 19 step. Once we have resolved the comments, the first step 20 is to issue the proof and review and collect the comments 21 from yourselves and from our technical staff within the 22 ragion. We resolve the comments. Then we go back to the 23 staff for concurrence and we go back to you and ask you to 24 certify that your tech specs do in fact match the plant as 25 built and the FSAR and the SER. And we have an independent ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.

~

202 347 3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 33M646

2513 01 01 40 enrysimons 1 consultant do an audit of all of that and we get his 1

2 results back. So it is about a month time period in there

.3 to allow for those things to take place.

4 MR. CONNER: Have you ever tried to do it on an

. 5 ongoing basis rather than waiting until all of this is in

, 6 place before having the consultant do his thing and 7 whatever?

8 MR. VIRGILIO: We would like to have him lock at a 9 final product, and at that point in time we have got a 10 final FSAR and a final SER.

11 MR. THOMPSON: This approach was the one that was 12 established by Mr. Denton after the Grand Gulf tech spec 13 review which you might consider was one of the more ongoing f

14 less systematic appr'oach which produced the set of tech 15 specs there when the plant was in the throes of finalizing 16 construction and rushing things through at the end and 17 resulted in the difficulty we experienced there.

18 . MR. CONNER: Understood, but I was really asking

. 19 have we learned enough since Grand Gult with all the other 20 boilers to maybe try something different that might speed 21 it up?

22 MR. BERNERO: This is not unique to boilers.

23 MR. CONNER: Well, all right.

24 MR. THOMPSON: I guess our review, the most recent 25 one would be River Bend, and ve found that in the last -

ace-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.

- . - _ _ - _ ,, _ _ S 347-3700 . Nationwide @ 800 336 4646

2513~01 01 41 cnrysimons 1 phase there were still significant changes that were being l i

2 made at the last minute because of a verification of the as-  !

3 built versus the FSAR versus the SER. So there were all .

4 these, you know, our experience would say it would take

. 5 about a month. It might take three weeks, but I mean it is 6 not something you just do in a day.

7 Mr. Mangan.

8 MR. MANGAN: Well, I want to wait for Harold. Is 9 Harold coming back?

10 MR. THOMPSON: I am more than willing to find out.

11 (Laughter.)

12 Why don't we take a five-minute break and I will 13 find out.

({ ', ,

14 (Brief recess.)

15 MR. THOMPSON: Harold, we have gone through the 16 staff's presentation which indicated a staff pr'oposal which 17 would -- you might put the chart back up on the last point.

18 (Slide.) .

. 19 It would end with the proof and review copy I 20 believe between the February 24th and the April 24th time 21 frame which would support licensing, and the earliest would 22 be early April I believe ---

23 MR. BUTLER: Mid April to late May.

24 MR. THOMPSON: Mid April to late May would be the I 25 time frame that that schedule would be. We would I think ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.

202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 336 6646

l 2513 01 01 42

.mtrysimons 1 say to take anything else out of that you would have to

(-

2 have a proof and review date earlier than the 24th of 3 February. And I believe that is predicated on getting the 4 FSAR revision --- '

. 5 MR. BUTLER: Around Christmas Eve.

6 MR. THOMPSON:- --- around the end of December, 7 Christmas Eve or something like that.

8 And I guess we were now going to hear from Niagara

. 9 as to what their proposal would be and the basis for it.

10 MR. DONLON: Well, I will ask other people.

11 Obviously the support puts the meat on the bones of what.I 12 am about to say. But basically what you are proposing here

.13 automatically results in a pinchback in our schedule

(((

14 Whether we consider February 24th to be the very best case, 15 it still.as far as we are-concerned achievable. The May 16 date as far as we are concernsd is very definitely the 17 worst case. And in any event,'what you are proposing is 18 l the very best we could do no matter what we do on our side -

r. 19 of the fence, so to speak, is load fuel in mid April. That 20 clearly represents a considerable impact'on our corporation 21 and on the costs of this plant in the event we can meet the 22 schedule that we believe we can meet.

23 I think the track record with respect to the f

24 turnover of systems that we have experienced right on up

(_, 25 through this past week will demonstrate that we can do ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.

8i3 @37 4700 . . _ Nationwide CE 800 33H646

12513 01 01 43 corysimons 1 better than the assumed average plant of again going.from 1

2 RPV to fuel load.

3 Frankly, this kind of a schedule is unacceptable.

4 I will have problems with my Board and understandably so,

. 5 and no one has shown me under any circumstances why we 6 .canhot, if we don't meet February-24, come much closer than 7 May and very likely much closer than mid April.

8 ,

And in any event, from what I hear also is that we 9 are going to wind up getting these at the last minute to 10 begin with in getting back to what Mr. Abbott said, and we 31 need these as soon as we can get them to begin with both 12 "or purposes of training our personnel, the ultimate safety A

( 13 in operations and the whole works.

14 -

Dean, can you add, or Chuck or Rick?

15 MR. DENTON: I think it is clear that our staffs 16 disagree. We have seen a lot of plants be built in the 17 last five years and finished and many-of them are right on 18 schedule and we don't disagree with.

.. 19 I would propose to do two things, go ahead and 20 send out this set of tech specs on Friday that you are 21 talking about and that gets the ball rolling and delegate 22 Bob Bernero, who is going to be with your plant for the 23 next 40 years ---

24 (Laughter.)

' 25 --- if he can stand it that long, to take a

< ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.

202-347-3700 Nationwide Coversee 2 336 4 646

~

I: .

2513 01_01 44

)

csrysimons 1 personal look as soon as you can get it scheduled because I 2 don't think there is any way we can resolve it here in the 3 -room. Obviously our intent is the same as yours, which is 4 not to get on the critical path, and if we can agree that l

.. 5* we are not wasting"our own resources and we can readjust 6 them. We just want to be sure that your realistically 7 facing your own challenge without shape it though. We just 8 want to follow it. ,

9 MR. MANGAN: Harold, implicit in what you say is 10 that if a review of this kind say a month from now, or I 11 don't care, at come point in time were to show more E12 progress than the staff now thinks, could you shrink the J} 13 sche'dule say in a month so as to accommodate an earlier 14 fuel loading date? In other words, you could put more 15 resources on it is implicit in what you say, and I am just 16 wondering if I understand that correctly?

17 MR. DENTON: Well, I don't think there has been 18 but one plant that got completed faster than our case load

. 19 forecast panel said.

20 Bob, do you want to comment on what your batting 21 average has been?

22 VOICE: Wnich one was that?

23 VOICES: St. Lucie 2.

24 MR. BERNERO: I think it is more to the point, you

, [

(. ,, 25 know, what Walt proposed is the very first step of your o

ACE FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.

l 202 347-3700 , Nationwide W_ 800 33M64 _,

~

2513 01 01 45

,ctrysimons 1 proposal and our proposal be the same, issue the proof and 2 review tech specs, and we are ready to do that.

3 The next step in what Walt proposed was that you 4 would make your last big FSAR mmendment. You have got a

- 5 lot of confirmatory and loose end items up there.

6 Now he proposed approximately one month from now 7 as the date for that. Are you prepared to do that tomorrow 8 or Friday or something like that? Righ,t there is a month.

9 MR. DENTON: We need time to get your last design 10 issues in to review them. I mean you can't dump 2,000 11 pages on us on the last day and say, you know, where is our 12 license.

13 The sooner you could do that and complete and

(

14 close out these loose ends, the sooner we will be. What I 15 would like nothing better in the case, and there have been 16 a few, is where we complete the safety review. We have the 17 SER and the license comes up and lies there on my desk and i

18 ages while we wait for you to finish the plant. And if we '

. 19 could get in that same posture here, I would love to be '

20 there.

~

21 But I think it is up to you to close out these i 22 loose ends where we don't & gree and get a final application 23 and then things can be totally determined by you.

24 MR. DONLON: Can you comment on that now, Ton'y , or 25 do you want to ---

ACE. FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.

g.347 3700 Nadonwide Coverap 800-336-66 4

2513 01 01 46 jacrysimons 1 MR. ZALLNICK: Well, we can get a lot of those 2 changes in. I-just think it is not fair to characterize it 3 as we haven't supplied this information. We supplied a lot 4 of information and we are waiting for the sta,ff on 80

. 5 percent of the stuff that was went back. They haven't 6 talked back to us.

7 MR. DENTON: All right. Well, we will have to 8 gear up to talk back if your schedule is as early as you ,

9 ,- think it is .- I think it is true that we have not seen your 10 plant as February '86 plant in our own thinking about it,

~

11 but I would say let's take the steps we can take.

12 1 Bob, can you get up there between now and a month

( 13 from now with whatever assistance you need? .,

14 MR. BERNERO: 'Yes, I can, certainly.

15 MR. DENTON: Maybe some people to help decide 16 whether we need to put more resources on this or not. It 17 is not that we are reluctant to do it. If we had infinite 18 resources we would try to.

. 19 I guess you should be aware that our best judgment 20 is you are not going to make February, not that we care one 21 way or the other.

22 MR. BERNERO: But given a choice of priorities, as 23 some of the evidence indicates, should we lean toward Hope 24 Creek first and then you people second or vice versa? And

( 25 you seem to be saying no, take us first, you know. We ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC. l

_ . . . . _ _ . - - _ _ _ 202-347-3700 , , _

Nationwide Coverage 800 33(H56d6 __

~2513 01 01 47 marysimons 1 think Hope Creek isn't going to make February.

/

4

~ 2 MR. MANGAN: We are not suggesting that you 3 reorient your priorities.

4 MR. BERNERO: Oh, no, no.

. 5 MR. MANGAN: All' we want to do is ask you for 6 support.

~

7. MR. DENTON: We will certainly support you. We 8~ have'this discussion on and off.

9 How does the region feel about this plant compared 10 to.the other plants?

11 MR. LINVILLE: I think the region feels-that Hope 12 Creek is definitely ahead of them at this point. I think

( 13 we view the Project 2 schedule for pre-ops that shows a May

'A

. 14 completion as being optimistic, but we are prepared to 15 support whatever they are able to achieve of course in our 16 in'spection effort.

17 I think that some of the things that happened in 18 the pre-op program, as someone indicated earlier, are

. 19 inputs into the tech specs. Somebody asked why it takes 20 five weeks. Some of the things that happen in the pre-op 21 program determine parameters which go into the tech specs

~

22 and that is one reason why it has to be in that sequencing 23 that was indicated earlier.

24 MR. CONNER: No, my question was different. The 25 fine-tuning I understand. I was thinking you were saying ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.

202 347 3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 336 6646 a __ <

~

2513 01 01 48 carysimons 1 you didn't turn any of this over to say the consultants p.

k 2 until the last "jotile" was in place. I don't think you 3 meant that now and I don't think tnat was what was meant 4 initially.

. 5 MR. LINVILLE: The region is prepared to do tech 6 spec audit with the consultant in January of the proof and

~

7 review version of the tech specs also.

8 MR. QUAMME: Which won't be available according 9 to this schedule.

10 MR. LINVILLE: They will be available next week?

11 VOICE: No, they come out Friday.

12 MR. LINVILLE: They will be available next week.

13 MR. ABBOTT: This proof and review copy that is 14 being --- .

15 MR. LINVILLE: That is what we use to do that 16 audit.

17 MR. THOMPSON: The staff is going to use it, the 18 region.is going to use it and you I guess will use that

, 19 same document both to develop procedures as you verify it.

20 And according to the proposal, Walt, is that all of those 21 responses would be in on January 24th.

. 22 MR. BUTLER: Right. l 23 MR. THOMPSON: Which you are saying that that ,

l 24 January 24th then has a typical completion date for turn-

'} 25 around resolution of those issues. If in fact your plant, ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.

202-347 3700 Nationwide Coverage Q3364646

2513 OlL01 49 strysimons 1 if there are_no issues and it is perfect, you know, then

.x

'- 2 you are not going to need a month's turn-around time. That 3 is the more differences that you identify between the FSAR 4 and the as-built of the plant or the procedures haven't

. 5 been run and you say we don't have this one, you are not 6 able to make a final set for your final certification tr.at 7 in fact these are precisely the tech specs you are ready to 8 use.

9 So that is the key. It is kind of a blending of 10 the completion of the construction as well as the i

11 documentation that support those two. And our best l'2 judgment is that as a program which goes with a January i'

13 24th date provides a sufficient amount of time for you to

_{

14 complete the up-front work and have the dialogue with the 15 staff and finalize the rSAR by the end of December which 16 gives the staff then that four weeks that it does to 17 complete the final review and certification.

18 If you were able to come in sooner, then the

, 19 document has few changes in the FSAR and that would just be 20 set as the end date and then we could ask the staff to, you 21- 'know, respond earlier, January 15th. But typically our

', 22 experience has been that it takes two to three weeks to get 23 back in and do that difficult review and that is a period i

, .24 of time that is important to do the quality type review

']) 25' that you need to do.

t ACE FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.

% >MmP 37ao Naionwidee soo 33He6

m T

!2513 01 01 50 J 'marysimons 1 MR. DENTON: I think when you send in this

/7'\

(.) 2 submittal in late December it would be important maybe to 3 be sure-you flagged in any changes you are proposing the 4 changes in the tech specs that.should result so they don't

, 5 get lost. In other words, you will have this so-called.

r-6 proof and review, but it seems to me since you made the 7 originating changes, then you could just put in there a f

8 section somehow that naturally these conforming changes 9 would have to be made and give you the burden of i 10 identifying in the first instance the changes that would

, 11 have to be made as a result of your submittal.

12' And my thought was that since it is such an

p. 13 important issue to_ have Bob or whoever he wants to assist 14 -

him do an onsite look, not to super'sede the case work

{ 15 forecast panel ---

16 MR. BERNERO: And replay the act perhaps in the 17 second' week in December, or something like that. ,

18 MR. DENTON: The last time you were up there I 19 guess was June, and you can take another look to see what

. 20 you would recommend.

l' 21 MR. BERNERO: That would give you a chance to look q

j 22 at those tech specs and also to satisfy yourself, you know, -

d

, 23 on the final FSAR, the loose ends, and also you have got 24 some very ambitious -- you are recovering that schedule

~

25 curve and you are eating up the negativity in your

~s I

ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.

l 202 347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 336 6646

~

2513 01 01 51 marysimons 1 schedule. That is what you are asserting today, and you

,. m A- 2 have got a couple of more weeks of proving that you are-3 maintaining that pace.

4 MR. DENTON: And if I can get up there with him, I

. 5 will try to'take a look before the end of the year and that 6 way we can decide how close you really are. It is 7 certainly not our intent to delay for delay's sake. We 8 just want to be sure you are not overly optimistic. That 9 .is why we had the six-month window as a general guideline,

" 10 and we are not within six months here.

t 11 MR. DONLON: If I understand this, and I could' 12 very well misunderstand, but what I hear you saying is that 13 the tech specs will be issued on Friday the 22nd.

14 MR. BERNERO: Yes. They are ready to go right 15 now.

16 MR. DONLON: And there isn't anything that will 17 take place between now and roughly a month from now, the

,a 18 24th of December or thereabouts, and we will do what we can

'19 as far as completing the FSAR. Up to that point everything i 20 is on go as far.as we are concerned unless we start

~

21 slipping one way or the other. Is that correct, and I am

^

22 looking at our fellows now?

j 23 Would you do anything less, let me put it that 24 way, than you would otherwise be doing?

25 MR. DENTON: Well, certainly not anything less.

s ACE. FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.

202 347 3700 Nationwide cowrese 800 3364646

~

2513101 01 52 corysimons'l We might be'oingd more.

^

fs

v. ~2 MR. BERNERO: What Walt proposed is we give you 3 the tech specs this week, we wait until December 24th for 4 your final FSAR major submittal, and then one month after 5 that we ' complete our effort.

6

• Now if we are to put resources in to beat an April 7 date, we have got to do that fairly soon and not wait until 8 January 24th.

9 MR. DONLON: All right. That would not be 10 sufficient for us to meet the early schedule.

11 MR. BERNERO: Now if you get the tech specs this 12 week and within about two weeks we meet again, then we have

~

13 the basis to accelerate the application of. resources and 14

• not waiting until January 24th but coming in a little 15 ' sooner.

16 MR. DENTON: And it is vit&l I think for you to 17 1 close out these open lines and the issues between us, and 18 if we haven't closed them, push us to close them. If you 19 are really that close, you need to close out these open 20 issues, and to wait until the end of the year for a plant 21 and expect to be licensed in February is really pushing the 22 resolution, and we need to tell you we are not. going to 23 adopt your method or you want a hearing if you don't agree 24 with us or vice versa soon so they don't linger. ,

25 I am sure they must not be difficult issues since l

-i- ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.

202-347 3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 336 4646

~

2513 01 01 53 )

ccrysimons 1 other plants that have dealt with the same design have i

2 gotten through this hurdle. We just need to close out the 3 technical issues. That is really what completes our 4 review. Then you are driven by their schedule, and I think 5 the most tests you complete the more resources you will see 6 the region pour in. And if you suddenly have a chance to 7 meet, I am sure the Regional Administrator will provide 8 resources to monitor it.

9 We just wanted to share with you the reason we 10 were doing what we were. And I would say then, after Bob 11 has had a chance to look at it, he can get back with you 12 and tell you what we have concluded and whether we can do

, 13 anything more or not.

14 MR. HOOTEN: Mr. Denton, are we doing anything 15 here to force an extension of the February fuel load date?

16 I don't see that we are, but I want to be sure that we are 17 not.

18 MR. DENTON: Not deliberately, but I wasn't 19 reassigning resources either today. So we are not forcing 20 it. ,

21 MR. BERNERO: In order to meet a February fuel 22 load date, we would have to get from you and apply by us 23 resources during the month of December that were not a

24 covered in what Walt Butler said.

25 So if we followed the pattern Walt Butler said a

ACE. FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.

202 347 3700 Nationwide Coverser 800 336 6646

, _. . . - - - - - - _ _ , _ . - . ~ . . - . - - _ - - - _ _

2513 01 01 54 COrysimons 1 about a December 2/4h submittal from you and a January 24th 2 response from us, that is an accomplished fact of actually 3 reflecting the April 18th or ---

4 MR. HOOTEN: And we can't tolerate that in our 5 schedule.

6 MR. BERNERO: We hear you and that is why we are 7 saying the first step is the same in both cases, to give 8 you the tech specs.

9 MR. DENTON: The best thing you could do is to not 10 wait until December 24th to get your filing in. Get it in 11 by the 1st of December. .

12 MR. THOMPSON: See, we can drive you. Once you c 13 get that filing in then ---

14 MR. DENTON: Our review is driven by the status of 15 your application readiness. And at the moment you are only 16 allowing in there 30 days for us to do what we have to do 17 to close up the SER. The sooner you can close it up and 18 , tie,a bow around it, and this is the plant design, then the 19 sooner we can finish tech specs and finish the SER and 20 finish the inspection and just wait for you. So I don't 21 think you ought to let your licensing side slide on scot 22 free. You have got to complete the licensing review as 23 well as complete the plant.

24 MR. DONLON: But you also, Tony, need some 25 expeditious response, right?

l ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.

) 202-347 3700 Nationwide Coverase 800 33H646

)

2513 01 01 55 ccrysimons 1 MR. ZALLNICK: Yes, sir.

2 MR. DONLON: So we have to work on that, too.

3 MR. DENTON: Some people have put an office here 4 in town somewhere that really facilitates around-the-clock 5 meetings until these issues close up.

6 MR. SCROGGINS: And we intend to schedule them at 7 your convenience.

8 MR. DENTON: Mary, do you have any comment on how 9 we might move faster on the open issues?

10 MS. HAUGHEY: As far as I am concerned, I think 11 the reviewers have been turning things around almost as 12 fast as we have been getting them. We have an SER that 13 should be out hopefully within the next week or two. It is

~

14 ) in the process of being printed.

-15 MR. DENTON: Since we have got enough people here 16 to finish the plant, what do you see as the major barriers 17 in a safety review that need to be pointed out?

18 MS. HAUGHEY: The most dangerous one 2 see is non-19 support of downcomers. The only other plant that has ever 20 come in with that before was Shoreham and they revised it 21 and put lateral supports under their downcomers. But the 22 biggest reason I see that as a problem is that could mean a 23 lot of hardware changes if it is not acceptable.

24 MR. DENTON: I take it our staffs are not closed 25 on that.

ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.

202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 300 336 6646

- - . 1 Ys 2513'01~01 56

, -ecrysimons 1 MS. HAUGHEY: They have not.

A 2 MR. DENTON: Are there any others that maybe 3 everyone should be aware of? Fire protection or EQ?

4 MS. HAUGHEY: The fire protection program has been 5 very good. However, I believe there is a lot of 6 implementation still left to be done.

7 The equipment qualification program, they have had 8 their SQRT and pump and valve audit. There are a number of 9 things to be closed which were identified at the audit and 10 will be identified in this SER coming out.

11 However, they have not had their environmental 12 qualification audit. It is scheduled for the middle of 13 December.

14 MR. DENTON: How about operator accreditatidn

-15 training and staffing issues? Is that ---

16 MS. HAUGHEY: I think the region might be better 17 able to address that.

, 18 MR. LINVILLE: They have sent one class of 19 operators up to get licensed. The SRO's did very well and 20 the RO's, they had a pretty high failure rate.

, 21 Their second group of operato'es are scheduled to 22 be examined in December. So we will have to see how that 23 develops.

24 MR. DENTON: If they all pass would they be enough (j 25 for their operation of the plant?

ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.

202 347 3700 Nationwide Coverase 800 336 4 646

I I

l l

2513 01 01 57 mtrysimons 1 MR. LINVILLE: I am not sure if there are enough i

2 RO's based on the Cecember date.

3 MR. QUAMME: Right now we have three RO's, and in 4 our class coming up we have 21 RO's in class. So that 5 would give us a potential for 24. We have 10 SRO's 6 currently, and we have 12 more going up this December.

7 MR. BERNERO: Do you use separate STA's?

,8 MR. QUAMME: Our assistant shift supervisors also 9' qualify for STA's and the second SRO on shift?

10 MR. THOMPSON: They are degreed individuals with 11 college degrees?

12 MR. QUAMME: Yes.

13 MR. DENTON: Maybe I should ask you if there are 14 any issues that you think conversely are major undecided 15 issues on your side?

16 MR. DONLON: Tony?

17 MR. ZALLNICK: Well, I guess my estimate of where 18 we are, if there are quite lot of the confirmatory items 19 which really need to have an NRC walkdown on audit, I think 20 it looks like nine or ten of them and most of them are 21 scheduled right now.

22 MR. DENTON: Do you know of any other issues in 23 which we appear at loggerheads that management needs to 24 focus on?

25 MR. ZALLNICK: The one that I can think of that we

(

ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.

202-347-3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 336 6646

\

2513 01 01 58 ccrysimons 1 haven't been ab? e to seem to get a resolution on is what

-(4 2 format to use for Section 6 of the tech specs, which is the 3 administrative control section. It is our position that 4 they should be consistent with Unit 1 since there is no 5 reason co make them different. With an aperating unit 6 already there, the administrative control section should be 7 the same. And the staff in what they have beer. =aying to 8 us has been pushing the standard tech specs, and that would 9 either cause us to change Unit 1 or have two different 10 administrative programs, and we don't think that is 11 appropriate. We are at loggerheads on chat one.

12 MR. DENTON: That is one that we ought to be able p

13 to focus on and solve pretty quickly.

14 MR. DONLON: Could you put a memo out on that?

15 ( Laughter. )

16 MR. THOMPSON: We can solve that on this section 17 of the proof and review copy that goes out and there should 18 be no long time to do that.

19 MS. HAUGHEY: I don't beliove we are still-pushing 20 them on that issue and I believe there were some things 21 that were ---

~

22 MR. BERNERO: You ought to be able to tell by i 23 looking at this set.

24 (Laughter.)

'[j 25 MR. DENTON: How about issues that are more 1

l Ac2-FEDERAL REPORTERS. INC.

202 347 3700 Nadonwide Coverage 800 33HM6

4 I

l L2513 01 01 59 7

m rysimons 1 hardware oriented, things that if we and you don't close

- 2 that you have to take down and redo?

3 Mk. ZALLNICK: The only one is the one Mary

- - '4 mentioned the downcomers, and I think that is resolvable 5 if we get the right people at the NRC together.

6 MS. MAUGHEL: We still don't have the outstanding 7 information we are looking for on that.

8 MR. ZALLNICK: Well, you l. ave to tell us what it 9 is you want.

5 10 MS. HAUGHEY: Okay. Well, we did receive a 11 package about a week and a ha>f ago and I think there is

^

12 ! more coming over today this afternoon.

13 , MR. ZALLNICK: We keep responding to follow-up 14 questions, but I think it really requires getting the 15 Structural Branch involved in this. This has been know for 16 two years about the unsupported downcomers. So it is 17 really a question of just I think getting enough, like we 18 I did in geology, just getting enough information on the 19 record to say yes, we can rake the decision.

20 MR. DENTON: Well, I realize it is an important 21 issue to you and I hope you 'see the need for us to have 22 reasonaaly accurate information. I would like nothing 23 better than for it turn out that we agree with your date 24 and move forward on that basis, but we will see what we can

/ , 25 do. At the same time, we feel some obligation to all our v

l .

ACE FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.

202 347 3700 Nasionwide Cowrage 800 33Mi646

. - _ . _ . - . . _ _ ~ ~ - _ . - _ . _ _ - . . _ . . _ _ . . . _ _ _ . . _ - . .~ . . - . . _ . , . - - - _ - _ - - _ . . . _ .

~

2513 01 01 60

,carysimons 1 other clients to be sure that your projections are not too 7

2 far out of line if they are.

3 MR. THOMPSON: All I can say :s from this meeting

'4 we will issue a set of tech specs as soon as we can and no

.. 5 later than Friday, and we can issue them earlier, we will 6 issue them earlier.

7 MR. DONLON: We were going to bring them back with' 8 us if you had them. .

9 (Laughter.)

-10 MR. THOMPSON: We will give you an advance copy so 11 you can start looking at them. But the one thing we will 12 not do at this particular time is establish a response date

. 13 until Mr. Bernero comes back, and that will depend in part (l

14 on when you get your FSAR submittal and his site visit.

-15 MR. BERNERO: I will consult with regional staff 16 and our own people, and what I will contact you for is I

. 17 would expect the first week of December that we should 18 revisit the subject. You will have had a chance then to

. 19 look at those tech specs, to get about two more weeks of 9

20 progress and I think sometime in the first week of December

21 would be the earliest we should meet again. And then if it 22 is appropriate, then the resources have to be realigned.

23 MR. DENTON: And I would suggest that when you 24 visit there, Bob, not to focus on paper, but on the outside

() 25 of the plant and see exactly how the plant looks and the

' ACE. FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.

202 347 3700 Nationwide Coverage 800 336 6646

~

-2513 01 01 61 ccrysimons-1 control room and how much work is remaining.

. ,C 2 . MR. DONLON: Okay. Very good, if we open that 3 up. If you will see fit, Bob, to come the second week of 4 December to ---

5 MR. BERNERO: You just slipped it a week.

6 (Laughter.)

7 MR. DONLON: It is going to take a few days.

8- Going up on a Friday that means Monday.

9 (Laughter.)

10 MR. DENTON: We want to get there before the deep 11 freeze sets in.

12 (Laughter.)

13 MR. DENTON: Well thanks for coming down.

14 MR. DONLON: Thank you.

15 (Whereupon, at 2:40 p.m., the meeting concluded.)

16 17 18 19

^

20 21 j 22 J

23 24

, ( ,

25 v

ACE. FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.

202 347 3700 Nationwide Coverses 800 336 6646

~

CERTIFICATE OF OFFICIAL REPORTER p

This is to certify that the attached proceedings before the UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION in the matter of:

NAME OF PROCEEDING: MEETING WITH NIAGARA MOHAWK POWER CORPORATION TO DISCUSS CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE AND READINESS FOR FUEL LOAD

. DOCKET NO.:

PLACE: BETHESDA, MARYLAND

' DATE: MONDAY, NOVEMBER 18, 1985 were held as herein appears, and that this is the original transcript thereof'for the file of the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

(sigt M" (TYPED) 6 MARY SIMONS Official Reporter i

~

ACE-FEDyRAL ReportersAgE}RTERS, INC.

. 1 ation I

-l. --Q ,e c. w

n.w uyg g g-

-~

,- > .,: : a w ; = , -. 7 Rli m. ., ..:. u a ,., a.. /: . <: '..: -

. : n .:.,,. ,

->--a -:- / = m..

x ,wW '

@ #n c A',~t ci/ier tir:temc fxMc~FzL

//$ S NA$

. fi'ri. %wao iu/'M/.Psz, M<--

Y.WH*~~i50MAfet iMILh L

/t.n. racaer ,vx c- co m ec a ,a nec a , e T M. AICVA.M p'O /tygg/o c-J','ycy B CQa, 0x% y'th&A,L, fc , Wu(Of

$ 6. llODTEN A!MPC ~ d'>:. Dir cW / lac [cw-Causfr.

ll) .T ho od /5/)A' ~~~Ses ia eW

< C. V. M A UGA LI N M K - s v. , U . Q .

~

J2. 8. Ageorr-etpc. - Srnnoo 6r-D. 53 (MfYIM6~ A2rHfC,~ =

b lYWA~W IN. K. orwl tvKC - ' l- B WZ RA 6/inmm A/A c 5,e . Aende,or /AM P.

M 7 Q<,cq tub tMLlt c_

k nni> CrAckbe~ld *ec/ dv0e,po

^

% le M'. Irle r sc/ ne / pt.

, Fntwh3.Crfnccro como (6f k td.Y. Es c

% 3.Glf M t{ s ? 6C

% .+ B wJwk IU a c - E L I) 6.E IJe ta turn A lan /DL piec/pmib c

~

Stawe 2LacL

. A.6 Z)7S #4m /r/ m 4 u' k d e ~s/ p 6,/ //=Y/fx0AdAl #NA'- 3/u )%%E. ,UJ/f- 3

l ge l

^

..+.

1

~ '

REMAINING t.ICENSING AND INSPECTION ACTIVITIES ~

• - RESOLUTION OF OPEN/ CONFIRMATORY' ITEMS-

~ : ..

.. 1*0F THE 18/55 OPEN/ CONFIRMATORY ITEMS. IDENTIFIED .IN THE SER (FEBRUARY,

'1985), 9/37 AWAIT APPLICANT ACTION TODAY.

• THIS~ ACTIVITY IS PACED BY-THE APPLICANT'S SCHEDUI.E FOR~ FURNISHING

-0UTSTANDING INFORMATION, MOST OF WHICH IS SCHEDULED FOR SUBMITTAL BETWEEN N0W AND THE END OF DECEMBER.

PREPARE-TECHNICAL. SPECIFICATIONS 1

' APPLICANT NEEDS THE' PROOF-AND_-REVIEW COPY OF THE TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS

.FOR USE IN PREPARING SURVEILLANCE TEST PROCEDURES.

' REGIONAL. INSPECTORS. NEED DRAFT T/S. FOR USE IN ITS INSPECTION

y. -ACTIVITIES.

j 'RECENT EXPERIENCE:HAS SHOWN THAT MORE TIME AND-RESOURCES NEED TO BE ,

x ..

'V Alt.0CATED TO THIS ACTIVITY BY All AFFECTED PARTIES.

' f .:

i ..

, ' - - REGIONAL INSPECTION ACTIVITIES' i!'

. ' CONSTRUCTION

. ' PRE-OPERATIONAL./ START-UP TESTING

SURVEIll.ANCE TESTING

.

• PROCEDURES lA I'

. ---_ - w - _-,. '... . - - - - - - ,

p r1..,-.q-..y,

. .m e . . <r < . ,

i ' ' ,

b-

e^

• F f -

x s

STATUS OF LICENSING ISSUES 2

?

s

.. g OPEN CONFIRMATORY-SER 11/18/85 SER 11/18/85' C

.NMP-2 18 - 9 55 37-

.M

--- HOPE CREEK 14: -7 37 -5 CLINTON -20 5 66- 8 7- , ,

J.

4 d

6 y

s 9

4 4

- 9 i

e

.e-

! , ,_n-, .-

v,-n-,. , . _ , ,.n-, , , , . , - - . -

. . . . , , . -_ m . . .

1k.

SEl.ECTED INSPECTION ACTIVITIES (11/11/85) t

~

'AS-BUILT VERIFICATION,.PRELICIENSING 5%

• SAFETY. COMMITTEE INSPECTION 0%

' OPERATING PROCEDURES. INSPECTION- 0%

> -1

• MAINTENANCE PROCEDURES INSPECTION- 0%

• EMERGENCY PROCEDURES INSPECTION 0%

• PRE-OP TEST PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION 10%

'CILRT RESULTS REVIEW -5%

RADIATION PROTECTION 20%

• EMERGENCY Pt.ANNING 0%

4

' SECURITY 15%

6

4 j s .g.=A 's pa+ .ai. uA.

e

, ('

RECOMMENDED

,.; COURSE OF ACTION

• STAFF.SHOULD. WORK WITH MAY 1986 AS-THE ESTIMATED FUEL LOAD DATE FOR 1..

SCHEDULING ITS LICENSING AND INSPECTION ACTIVITIES.' THIS DATE TO BE

-ADJUSTED DEPENDING ON PROGRESS AT THE PLANT.

' ' STAFF TO 'BEGIN AN EXTENDED PROOF-AND-REVIEW CYCLE FOR'.THE TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS 0N NOVEMBER 22,'1985 I* APPLICANT SHOULD FILE ITS' AMENDMENT TO THE FSAR AS A RESULT OF ITS.

?.

ONGOING'AS-BUILT CERTIFICATION PROGRAM BY DECEMBER 24,'1985.

'COMENTS ON THEPR0OF-AND-REVIEW COPY WIll BE REQUIRED N0 t.ATER

THAN JANUARY 24.-1986.

C i f

'- -* COMPLETION OF THE PROOF-AND-REVIEW CYCLE WIll 0CCUR IN THE

-2/24/86 - 4/4/86-TIME-FRAME.

( ,.

-*DURING WEEK OF JANUARY 27. 1986, STAFF WILL CONDUCT A MAJOR REEVALUATION 0F THE NMP-2 REVIEW SCHEDut.ES.

i

-' APPLICANT SHAll KEEP THE REGIONAL OFFICE APPRISED OF ITS [

SCHEDULES TO ASSURE THAT THE INSPECTION ACTIVITIES CAN BE ACCOMPLISHED IN A TIMELY MANNER.

,~ .

s

~

.,4

8.  ;

w. _

CASE LOAD FORECAST PANEL'

- MEMBERS.

AL SCHWENCER, LEADER

- M..HAUGHEY

• ~

' R..HARTFIELD

- R. GRAMM ,

• - A. CERNE ,

4 , . .

Ic .

ACTIVITIES-FIRST MEETING: FEBRUARY, 1983 FINDINGS: FLD = LATE - 1986-

• i SECOND MEETING: OCTOBER, 1984 FINDINGS: DEFERRED TO 3RD MEETING 1- ' THIRD MEETING: JUNE, 1985-FINDINGS: LATE - 1986 r

r

?

N ='.

p v s ,, ~..y-e-,e,,.,,--a-,- ,w- ,.

,m-,4.-,- , ,. . ,, , - , , , , , , ., . . . , ,-,--,e . . , , ,,, p... -. - . _- . . ,,p.,. ,-4 -

9 ,n..,-.,y, y,,,., 4

~

a *

?

.,-r

• ~'

CLP FINDINGS 1

- ESTIMATED F.L.D.: LATE - 1980 v , BASES

' MONTHS FROM COLD HYDRO' .

=' PROGRESS AT TIME OF COLD HYDRO

~'SUBSEQUEliT PROGRESS

-C0FN0DITIES BUILDING TURK 0 VERS.

,~ -SYSTEM TURNOVERS PRE-0P TESTING ,

SURVEILLANCE TESTING I

PROCEDURES DEVELOPMENT f

.47 h- egg 6h 4

---

Fmg --

=,y--+-r -wy =w - yw-e-m ---y y .w

1(

}<?

~

a

. A.

c,. ,

, ~ . - . - -

\ s PREOPERATIONAL'-TEST PROGRAMS FOR OTHER BWR'S-6; (COLDHYDR0TOLOWPOWERLICENSE)

FIRST UNITS POST-TMI DURATION (MONTHS) 4 LA SALLE 1- 17

SUSQUEHANNA 1- -21 WNP-2~ 16

. GRAND GULF 1 18 .

,.~- FERMI 2 32

(

, . LIMERICK 1. 14 RIVER BEND 15 (SHOREHAMNOT' INCLUDED).

4 AVERAGE 19 SECOND UNITS POST-TMI t..

LA SALLE 2- 14

'SUSQUEHANNA 2 9 COLD HYDRO AT NMP-2:' APRIL 1985

.s -

'b'

+

Y $

fkt t '

A; -

COMPARISON OF PREOPERATIONAL-TEST PROGRAM. STATUS (11/11/85)'

NINE MILE

.{~' POINT 2 =

HOPE CREEK TOTAL NO. OF PRE-OP' TESTS 106 149 INUMBER OF APPROVED PROCEDURES 80 110 v iTESTS COMPLETED. 8 53'

'~

- - >-. RESULTS REVIEWED BY SORC- 0 34 RESULTS APPROVED BY SORC 0 -28

.y' i .

if ~. ;

e

<S e

-$#g I, .

y-

- ~

e, ~e-m!

PROGRESS AGAINST 13 WEEK NEGATIVITY SCHEDULE-

. . SOLID RADWASTE SCHEDULE'DATE ACHIEVED

. . . (AS OF 11/11/85)

.CONSTRUCTIONCOMPLETION 10/25/85 NO START PREL. TEST 10/28/65 NO COMPLETION PRE-OP 4/11/86 N/A-

,A REACTOR PROTECTION SYSTEM CONSTRUCTION RELEASE 11/07/85 NO COMPLETION COLD FUN.-TEST 05/26/86 N/A

'l 3

4*

6

+

i'

' 1.g 4-

7.,

s 8

' h3 PROJECT STATUS EST. AS OF 11/13/85 o PERIOD % COMPLETE 1.33 VS. .72 PLANNED -

O PROJECT % COMPLETE 93.95 VS. 97.00 PLANNED A. ,

o PERIOD $'S EXPENDED $65.9M VS. $51.4M PLANNED o - YEAR-TO-DATE EXPENDED $641.5M VS. $625.1M PLANNED 4

8 9

6 t

t

, s me'

+

< -- w e ss-- w -- mw- -, e.--m-i.23--.-,v,mm.e--w'=?- --we*--me-- P--*'-r-t'-*-*wew"' vw"r w'-**'"'T*""

7-"T'"--*'w'*-

ESTIMATED PROJEC" P3RC DT C0K?Lrs N.M.P.#2 1005

~

985 e' [~7 97.005 :W 965

/

/

. us - = . = ===

95 --

/

~

la 20. -

/ /

O 885

g. /

m 8a /

845

' // -

825

.(

$ud.*' nee.u'Apr.8s ' Aug.8snee.8s Apr.86 Aug.86 Dec.86 9

- .._.m -

II '

NMCPGRPH13 IK E Y PROJECT COMPLETION ACTIVITIES SUBSYSTEM SYSTEM SYSTEM BUILDING ACCEPT / PRE-OP "A" RELEASES RELEASES TURNOVERS TURNOVERS TEST COMPLETIONS 360- 108- 108- 30- 13 7 -

351- 106-

/

333-91_

62- -

15-47-9- 46-

/

• 34-TARGET FOR NOVEMBER 15, 1985 - STATUS -

- NOVEMBER 11 ,1985

• 11 COMPLETE PRESENT STATUS 1

- ~

SYSTEMS COMPLETION TRANSITION

. "A" S

R y

,, a 5

/ , L T v g

$ 7 C T TION ST0 AVAILABLE AT/ POT Y FM D OCgsh AT/ Of Y TESTING P RE 5'

^"

7 0 1 1 1 1 2Q) il )

. ,31p 30s 22n es Sn .32s 'Ss ,

1 8 1

.- T IIPI 1 I 3I I N

• 19s 26s 48 12s 24s 1Ss IhyH

= 3. 4* iS 2fi)) .ih .

2n 33s 7s 14s 268 18s .

84 1 27 19 8 215) j 101 11 28 20 7 385) 13 29 21 8 4t5) 17 30 33 10A SIS) 31 38 36 18 9IC) 34 37 38 22C 10885) 40 50 42 23 10C15) 41 78 43 26 12tC) 4S 44 39 1415)

, 47 S1 44 1 SIC) ,

l 52 SS S4 ISIC) 53 GG S7 17 - 18 518 P ) I

, S8 60 72 SS 17 - 3 8 511 P ) j 10 0 A $9A 22A-115) 61 1000 598 2 2 A-285) l 62 S9C 228tC) 3, L 63 63 24tc)

I 75 64 2 SIS)

I' 76 65 3215) 77 66tP) 4815) 79 67 49 -185) 40 69 4 9- 285) 81 70 49- 315)

,'!, 82 71A 49 - 415) l .; 85 715 S 4 -it C)lP)

'j 86 74 5 8 - 3 8 5 )(P )

,3 88 84tP) 4 4 - 18 5 )l P) 90 91 6 6 -It $)lP)

[ 92 96 6 6 - 315 )( P )

94 106 6 4 - SI C)lP) 97 7 3 - 11 C ) ,

102 73-2tC) j

^

103 7 4 - 11 C)l P )

v 104 7 4 - 2 t Sil P) l 105 '

i- 10 7

' IPg = P ARTI AL SYSTEM ill : litlH.9:L'11st >

w,-.-., -,n..- .~ ,,, . ,,--,-. -,,-, -- ,..- . - - - , - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ - - - .

Tib.

g.

u

.r p -

H

?[1 x

c p(

",

MILESTONES STATUS

-o I.. 4160V ENERGIZATION COMPLETE

_2._ -DIESEL GENERATORS IN PROCESS

3. INTEGRATED-FLUSH /RPV HYDRO COMPLETE

. 4. TURBINE GENERATOR VACUUM PULL IN PROCESS

5. VENTILATION BALANCING FEB 86

~

' '~~

6. INTEGRATED LEAX RATE TEST 4 FEB 86

7. RADWASTE SYSTEM 20 FEB 86

8. FUEL RECEIPT AND TRANSFER 7 NOV 85

^

9. LOSS OF POWER /ECCS 14 JAN 86

~

10. . FUEL LOAD 24 FEB 86

, , 11. COMMERCIAL OPERATION OCT 86

'l 4 Nas*

l t

._. -. ., . , , . , . . - - . , _ . . , - _ _ - , - - - - - - - - - - . _ _ _ _ . . _ . - - . ~ - . . _ . - _ . _ - _ . , - _ . . _ - _ . . _ . - - . ,

i I

-a .

a l

1 -. g 4

a 2

( .

s z E 3 a -

A

, I -' .-

[

, -2 n l

{ -a

- as 2s

-. - -a p 3 m a n

5

.: 4 3

• • 11 -

8 a

3 35

=

s a s o

s s 2 B*a

.- a go i

> g g

6g

-s .

A 1 *

.s A E!

8 64 e >

og .

l __ Vd

3

-3 w *C 3 -8

~

-s

-~ . 24 t

u >

s.  :

• 1

- .: ~. **

5

.:. .: :1-  :

.:.... .:I  : .-

.  : _0 ,. - ..

M .

W ..'  :

' i i w

z

.2:

.s.

. a.

: : : 4: .

1:.: 1:

c:  ::

: s;  : -

C *: 4"3

< 4J 3: .

wE OJ ,3.

.?.

23* I;;:j::

2'E a5.

I

['

1.

• '1:

0 g: *:

: tl 4 20 22:

1,;4 6

4-3,- '

i "II .;

.. _:  :  ::  :: a 3 H

wJ w :"!!- t 3.!!:.:

!1 3.:

- a l l* : '! ;; *' : :*.'! .  :  :

5

1. .:3

=

1.

3 a l! ". -

: .::. :: :- . - o .=. ;

. . 1 3 & a ; *. .: 3 _* :_ . - . . * :

a w  : . . .; o . . . . .

1

: : : - : g 1:::1:

; * -

: ::I t. .:: .g :: 3 3: : i:: :1 :.: 0 1 . * *. ,

u _.:. 2:.r34:r

- . 1

< -s. I t = ....2. 5.

:. s.:...:o-o.*u

._.' -'.t e- :: : : : - :: ::

w  ;

s *

• i i .,.I . n ., i

,_. i i d a n n .s.4sss.;.; I - n e. sa 1 n *,

. $~~n.***

)

a a -  ;

a a , t I '

1

. . . . - _. . .- .~ -- - - .. - --

l OVERALL RECOROS TURNOVER PROGRESS NOV 11,1985 1,763.882

- 1002 100 90s 1,499, 00 t

85m GOAL-FEB '86 FUEL LOAD

, = .= . 0 74 5 - 70s g 61m 5

SYSTtu W'W w

-60m e

- 50s M 60s

i

- 40s j.

3

• GENT lMC P2.8 7 7

- 30s _

25 l

i

- 202 ,3 so 65s 4

- 10 s AOMM o2Ls3n sn '8 _

Os

{ m LESS THAN ta

! 68m GENERIC RECORDS j 282 ADMIN RECORDS j 4m SYSTEM RECORDS  ;

I 100m TOTAL .3 t

.. . m -

t

-if NRC AUDITS t

• PV0RT/SQRT.............................,....... COMPLETE f

• SPDS........................................... COMPLETE o APPENDIX R (FIRE PROTECTION)................... COMPLETE

• EQUIPMENT QUALIFICATION..................... DECEMBER 85*

• TECH SPECS STATUS........................... DECEMBER 85

• TMI ISSUES.................................. DECEMBER 85*

~ '

• NDE VAN VISIT.............................. DECEMBER 9-20

• NRC' COMMISSIONER'S VISITS................... FALL / SPRING e DIRECTOR,OFFiCENUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION READINESS VISIT............ SPRING 86

' CHANGED SINCE LAST CO-TENANT MEETING 1

6

-_+

December 13, 1985 .

MEETING

SUMMARY

DISTRIBUTION 2-cketNo(s): 50-410 NRC PDR Local PDR BWD #3 r/f J. Partlow (Emergency Preparedness only)

E. Adensam Attorney, OELD ll . 'T. Jordan

,..fgi Grimes

~_.

In d (10)

Pi / ject Manager _M. Haughey P. Hylton NRC PARTICIPANTS M. Haughey J. Linville H. R. Denton R. M. Bernero H. Thompson R. M. Scroggins T. Novak Troy B. Conner, Jr.

W. Butler R. A. Gramm M. J. Virgilio D. Crutchfield C. Miller R. J. Giaccio B. M. Bordenick E. J. Weinkar.;

S. Black

' a , c: t o m t.

Id ll'i ? D _ _

bec: Applicant & Service List L- _]