ML20058P489
| ML20058P489 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Vogtle  |
| Issue date: | 12/14/1993 |
| From: | Taylor P NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | GEORGIA POWER CO. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20058P407 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9312270159 | |
| Download: ML20058P489 (4) | |
Text
,
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION PEFORE THE ATOMIC aM ETY AND LICEN8ING BOARD In.the Matter of
)
-)
Docket Nos. 50-424-OLA-3 GEORGIA POWER COMPANY, et al.
)'
50-425-OLA-3
)
.i (Vogtle Electric Generating Plant
)
Re: License Amendment.
a Units 1 and 2)
)
(Transfer to Southern
)
Nuclear)
INTERROGATORY RESPON8E OF PETER A. TAYLOR' TO GEORGIA POWER COMPANY'S OCTOBER 8,.1993 FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND SECOND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS TO THE NRC STAFF
- i STATE OF GEORGIA
)
-f COUNTY OF FULTON
)
l Peter'A. Taylor, having first been duly sworn, hereby' states j
i as follows:
I am employed by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC),
Region II, Atlanta, Georgia as a Reactor Inspector.
'I served'in this position in the spring of 1990.
On October 7, 1993, Georgia Power Company (GPC) served interrogatories upon the. NRC which called for information I possessed on or about June 14, 1990.-
I.
have been informed in general. terms by staff counsel that the l
interrogatories result from an administrative proceeding in which j
an intervenor has alleged that~GPC knowingly submitted. incorrect information to the NRC (in LER 90-06 and at a meeting in NRC's
]
-Atlanta, Georgia office on April 9,
1990); regarding diesel generator starts following a March 20,'1990, site' incident. Having been so advised of the background of the interrogatories, I respond
-l here to the interrogatories which refer to me..
I 9312270159 931220
-PDR. ADOCK 05000424 LO-PDR
INTERROGATORY 1 Describe in detail the information or knowledge obtained by
[ Peter A.
Taylor] on or before April 9,
1990, regarding Plant vogtle Unit i emergency diesel generator problems associated with diesel generator sensors / switches after March 20, 1990.
RESPONSE
On April 5, 1990, I was requested by my Section Chief in the Test Programs Section to travel to Plant Vogtle to observe Technical Specification surveillance operability tesi:' of Unit 1 emergency diesel generators (EDG).
I arrived at thw piant on the morning of April 6, 1990 and met with NRC Inspector Milton Hunt.
He briefed me on Unit 1 EDG's status and the schedule for EDG surveillance testing.
This general briefing given to me by Mr.
Hunt constitutes the extent of my knowledge regarding Plant Vogtle Unit 1 EDGs after March 20, 1990.
l on the evening of April 6, 199J, Mr. Hunt and I witnessed a Technical Specification operMiility test of Unit 1, EDG 1A.
The test was performed using the normal plant surveillance test procedure.
My observations of test activities indicated that EDG 1A voltage, frequency, electrical load and test duration met surveillance procedure requirements.
I identified no problems or concerns during the test.
On the morning of April 7, 1990, Mr.
Hunt and I arrived on site to observe additional surveillance tests of EDGs.
GPC indicated that no further tests were planned.
We left Plant Vogtle on April 7, 1990.
]
]
^
1 INTERROGATORY 2 Describe in detail the additional information or knowledge obtained by
[ Peter A.
Taylor]
on or before April 19,
- 1990, regarding Plant Vogtle Unit i emergency diesel generator problems associated with diesel generator sensors / switches after March 20, 1990.
RESPONSE
On April 9, 1990, I attended a meeting between GPC personnel and the NRC in the Region II office.
GPC made a slide presentation concerning the March 20, 1990 event and the corrective actions taken.
I attended the meeting for the purpose of answering questions concerning the surveillance test I observed on April 6, 1990.
No questions were asked of me.
A slide was presented at this meeting concerning EDG tests.
I recall that the slide listed troubleshooting tests, maintenance tests and engineering tests to check diesel generator sensors / switches.
The slide indicated that a number of these tests were satisfactory, approximately 18 or 20 each for Unit 1 EDGs.
The slides were not meaningful to me, as I had no knowledge or information concerning diesel generator problems associated with diesel generator sensors / switches.
These responses are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.
Respectfully submitted, Peter A. Taylor Reactor Inspector Division of Reactor Safety ImC, Region II
Sworn and, subscribed to before ne this /Y O day of December, 1993 dAtlM $. YMLA Notary Public d
My Commission expires:
!!*7 PtNo.CAS Cotrfy,Gorgia Myco. erX:a ErP::s /;r31.1998
.I 1
l
!