– We are building the third and fourth reactors in parallel. All works are strictly on schedule. At that, the third reactor is a pre-startup facility; its first criticality is set for October 23 and the first power is for December this year. Now, construction and installation go in parallel at the third reactor. Recently, we have completed one of the key stages, i.e. loaded all fuel assembly dummies in the reactor. In essence, it is ready for the stage of pressure tests and circuit purging. At this stage the assembling quality is checked. How is it done? We achieve parameters similar to the operating mode: water temperature in piping is increased up to 180°С and pressure is raised up to 250 kg/cm2. In August, the reactor will be subjected to hot trials, which will help to check on whether the equipment parameters meet the design requirements. Besides, the installation workers have started assembling the last, fourth, reactor coolant pump and its idle runs will start on the coming days.
Then, there will be the containment tests. As per the initial schedule, they should have been started a little bit earlier. But to start-up the reactor by the set date, we decided to follow a different logic and carry out all operation in a different sequence but within a shorter time. Certainly, all changes in due dates and sequences were agreed upon with the customer.
As to the fourth reactor, all works are on schedule there. At present, concreting of the reactor building up to elevation +39.13 meters is under way, as the turbine foundation. The work is carried out at other on-site facilities. By the end of this year we will complete concreting of the exhaust sections of the cooling towers.
– How did the schedule shift affect the work progress?
– Any departure leads to some difficulties. The schedule clearly states the due dates of the equipment deliveries. If one moves the work due to earlier dates, the equipment deliveries have to be moved too. Most of our equipment pertains to higher safety classes and this adds difficulties to both the producers and us, as regards the procurement.
To shorten the work implementation time, one has to raise labor efficiency. To fit the schedule, we have to engage additional highly skilled specialists and reduce non-productive losses. By the way, the ROSATOM Production System is very handy in this, but losses cannot be always revealed. If there are no force majeure associated with deliveries and equipment deficiencies, everything will put together.
– Will you use the time shortening experience at the fourth reactor?
– It’s a good question. Yes, at the fourth reactor we use the experience obtained at Unit 3 to the full extent. We try to implement some of construction and installation approaches and the time saved as a standard at Unit 4. However, on the whole, I don’t project the time shortening at Unit 4. This is linked with the equipment deliveries. Everything is contracted so that I don’t foresee any shortening of the construction time of Unit 4 by date.
– The 60 working days are not too short …
– That’s right. But judging from the overall time of the reactor construction that is five years it does appear a short period of time. In fact, all operations have been shortened by four months rather than two months. It is because the equipment has to undergo necessary checks and incoming inspections; processes and related bureaucratic procedures are reduced and shortened.
– Won’t such shortening affect quality?
– It won’t, unambiguously. Neither change in schedule will ever lead to degrading of quality. All processes, stages and works that must be implemented will be implemented irrespectively of shortening or extending the implementation periods. The only thing we could employ is to reveal and cut-off non-productive losses. For example, we have introduced the electronic document flow and this has substantially reduced bureaucracy. Besides, the equipment producers made advances to us, so this helped to expedite the delivery of equipment to the construction site.
The two-month reduction of time is a deliberate decision. Today, it wouldn’t have been possible to move the start-up of the reactor five months earlier; it would have led to a failure to meet the technology requirements. Therefore, I’m not concerned about quality, because all procedures and regulations are strictly followed.
– The shortening of construction time can be compared to the anti-crisis management. Have you set up a team capable of solving such problems?
– It is being set up. If we achieve the goal we are charged to achieve, i.e. the shortening of construction time of Unit 3, I can say with full confidence that the team has been set up, the procedures are well-established, and there is a guard of professionals you can deal with any problems with.