ML20078G289

Intervenor Exhibit I-89,consisting of 890330 Article, Synopsis:Farley Discusses Sonopco Status

ML20078G289
Person / Time
Site:	Vogtle
Issue date:	01/12/1995
From:	Henry J SOUTHERN COMPANY SERVICES, INC.
To:
References
OLA-3-I-089, OLA-3-I-89, NUDOCS 9502030056
Download: ML20078G289 (5)

Text

____ _

$ arch 30.1989 l t- Vol L No. 6 [~-[f O e 10CKEiED JA P 3 :17 l  %

6 h pubitshedfor the furtw w tv N N WO project

(} U W . i

, RUL Farley discusses SOXOPCO status On March 1. Joe Farley became w - -- - . . - -. w e ==uss i executive vice president nuclear -

~

-- - - -- -~ '4 for The Southern Company and

~

~ ~ ~*

• assumed overall responsibility . -+

for providing management and "

-~ ~

technical services for the . .-

nuclear power plants in the .E I'~ - $

Southern electric system. '

-- - ~s Y

In a March 15 meeting with / ~,- [

4 system editors, Farley talked Tg about SONOPCO and its future. I i

F.

S.

Does your recent appointment #

s indicate that Securities and .

1f -

Exchange Commission (SEC) approval for forming SONOPCO hr~ .,,

! s imminent? Il l

d like to say that it does - but in 1 candor. that's probably not th.

case. Still pending before the SEC

l is an intervention filed by , '

l Oglethorpe Power Corporation. a co owner of Plants Hatch and

! Vogtle.

Since early last year, we've been  ;;g -

holding discussions with ,

,, . ~ :';8 Oglethorpe Power. seeking first an N agreement and subsequently, a -

withdrawal of that group's petition.

So far, our discussions haven't .,

j been successful. That's why we .

1 began pursuing another altemative

- in March with the filing of an offi- ..

4 cial response at the SFC to .

]

Oglethorpe's petition. Oglethorpe is not, in an overall sense, opposed to /

8 "

ytu -

. the project. 1 i 3l' In the absence of an agreement, the SEC is likely to hold public jii* '

cr j E<

hearings, and that process could E j be lengthy. But we're determined nature of the contractual relation- oppostuon has been raised over

- ship that would exist between the formation of the nuclear

! O to die press forward r">ies. i the -e to obtain time. "ra favor-ocieta <rc " *er oc rc' "e-er s"'e'e> <x '" re<<. ocie<* erne

dialogue with Oglethorpe Power and the other co-owners and with Power has indicated it is very o SONOPCO. and with the compati- supportive of the ba ,ic concept of s) ntinues. bility of that with Georgta's SONOPCO. That s why I m still that's the nature of Oglethorpe present position as operator of the optimist c that we can resolve Power's objections to SONOPCO7 Hatch and Vogtle plants. theseissues.

"Ihe key question involves the It's important to note that no CONTINUED 9502030056 950112

. PDR ADOCK 05000424 I

. G PDR Exhbt - ,page of I

' 1 I

• b O

i I

i

\

1 1

i l

l l

l l

I l

l P

NUCLEAR 6t AbJ0.9Y COMMISDON gc . 4 ) *4 -* L A ~

Do;LM ra,{o *f2f- 6 A*3 _C' ' Dh. f!0. bN

, t,,, v.

rs o.

(

_ ,._A .._ [cw or . _. L.L_* ** t. %

! * ~L d' \

Sr. r .i.__..___

V to +. 4._ E _ . 4 c,

j

.- o . . , . _ . -

L .

,gy,7 Ono W, m b& polk! * * #

.- i

Page 2 4

What are th3 mal:a cdvantag30 cf employees assigned directly to th' Is the basic SONOPCO crganiza forming a nuclear operating SONOPCO project. 'Ihey remain tion now in place? Or do you company? employees of their respecuve expect other major changes afte p A single focus organizauon allows companies, but by bringing them the corporation is approved?

us to pool the highly specialized together in Birmingham adjacent While we've made a lot of progress nuclear experuse of the Southem to SCS engineering personnel, we still have a good way to go. Ou:

electric system, and that should were already reaping some of the basic structure is in place, but produce a number of advantages. benefits that a combined nuclear we'll have to add a few more func-It should conunue as well as operation can bring to the system. tions once SONOPCO is formed.

enhance the overall safety and For example, we'll need to operate performance of our nuclear power Could you be more specific a payroll system. which we'll adap facilities. The move will promote a shout the benefits that the from existing programs within the better interchange of technical combined nuclear operation is system.

infonnation, and the rahared exper- reaping? When we're fully operational, wi tise can help improve our manage- The corporate staffs from the three expect to have a small corporate ment controls. our procedures and companies are working well staffinterfacing with more than our problem-solving process, together, and we're seeing benefits 3.000 plant personnel.

Bringing all three of the from improved communications system's nuclear power plants among the groups. Everyone's The SONOPCO project was under a common umbrella should attenuon is focused on efDefencies, staffing its organization at the offer some cfnciencies as well. safety and economic operation. same time that SCS employees Industrywide. nuclear operation From my experience as were being laid off. Were any and maintenance costs have been chairman of the Institute of special considerations given to increasing dramaucally over the Nuclear Power Operations [lNPO). hiring SCS employees?

past decade. and that's also true I've seen evaluations of plants The timing of our move has been for our system. We're convinced across the country. From these. both fortunate and unfortunate --

that we can exercise better control you can identify many of the fortunate because more than 100 over those expenses by combining factors that make for a successful SCS employees were transferred our nuclear operauons. plant operation. M re and more of into the new organizauon. and t~ tat Another advantage is that those factors are becoming helped reduce the number of SONOPCO will help us retain and apparent at the SONOPCO project. layoffs required at SCS. But it's moteate our nuclear specialists. as we gain experience working unfortunate that some ill feelings 3

The combined operations will together and as our plants benefit resulted from a perception that the provide greater career paths and from a closer knit organization stafDng of the SONOPCO project employment opporturuues for our with full senior management was inconsistent with the down-nuclear professionals. approval. sizing of SCS.

Overali, we believe a nuclear One impression that needs to be operaung company will enhance What do you see as your primary corrected is the the consolidation safe operauon and minimize the role now, and will that change of our nucle u support staffs amount of investment required to when SONOPCO becomes a created a number of newjobs in produce nuclear power. So there is corporation? the system. In fact, when all the also a compeuuve advantage in My most immediate goal is to changes are f!nally made, our creating a subsidiary with the sole provide the leadership and support combined operations should be purpose of running all of our needed u get SONOPCO off on the slightly smaller than the individual system's nuclear facilities. right foot. For the past few years, units that were in place at the I've worked part time on the three separate companies.

What is the current status of the concept and. more recently, on the However, as is the case with SONOPCO project? To what organizauonal structure for this this type of move, some people did extent has the system already project. I'll continue to give much not wish to transfer to combined its nuclear resourcesI of my attention te organizational Birmingham, resulting in jobs that We've now brought together the issues. are being filled through system-corporate stafTs of the nuclear It's important that we develop wide searches and job postings.

support groups of Alabama Power an appropriate " fit" within our We'll continue to fill any openings and Georgia Power along with system. And once we're fully estab- through these methods, which Southern Company Services (SCS) lished. I want to ensure that we should help ensure that we give personnel supporting licensing, operate in a way that brings added appropriate consideration to SCS nuclear fuel management and value to shareholders and employees and other system other nuclear areas. We've also customers alike. We intend to be a personnel.

collected a srbstantial part of the prudently managed. efDclently run administrathe support for the company that enhances the opera- Would you respond to the h combined entity. Uons of the system's nuclear perception by some that the D As of March, we had some 330 facilities. SONOPCO project is an exten-Southern electric system 92 PROJECT sica of Alabama hwer?

072335 l

Exhibit ,pageO of k

Page r l O That PercePtien is wrees. newever. w aen that Pesit>en ca m e ePen.the seve rears em ineo s deard or it was--in a sense- inevitable when Southern electric system already directors including two years as

, the decision was made to locate had long-range plans for a nuclerr chairman. That experience puts the headquarters in Birmingham operating company. A systemwide me in a position to lead this and when several members of the search revealed that Pat Mcdonald nuclear operating organizauon in i management team came from was doing a good job at Alabama. Its formation. i Alabama Power. Our management So the logical thing to do was to So the misperception isjust '

! structure, however, includes ask Pat to take the position at that--a rnisperception.

, employees from both Georgia Georgia in addition to the one he '

Power and SCS, and our corporate held at Alabama. Yes. he's from Will SONOPCO continue to rely l staff is an almost equal mix from Alabama. But he was chosen not on SCS for a range of nuclear all three companies. Here are because of that, but because he support services, or will some o .

slightly fewer employees from was a logical choice. those activities eventually be Georgia Power than the other two Then. I was placed in charge of incorporated into the work of l companies only because a number the SONOPCO project, and like the new subsidiary? I

of people from the support groups Pat. I'm from Alabama Power. That We don't envision any significant in Georgia elected not to move. If just added another dimension to change in our relationship with th

we had located in Atlanta there the misperception. But I wasn't service company. We've examined l would have been employees who chosen because I was at Alabama. this issue carefully. and we're very wouldn't have wanted to move If you look at the circumstances at comfortable with the work being there from Birmingham. Georgia Power. Alabama Power provided by SCS.

Apparently, some folks took the and SCS. you'll see that I was the It's important to note that the fact that we are located in only chief executive who was avail- services offered by SCS go beyond

Birmingham, added the fact that able to take on this project. Bob nuclear expertise. SCS provides our top nuclear management came Scherer is retinng in a couple of many administrative support func from Alabama. and reached an months, and Bill Dahlberg has tions, such as printing. telephone erroneous conclusion. In other just undertaken a big responsi- service, building management, words, they added 2 and 2 and got bility with Georgia Power. Information resources support.

6. It may seem logical to arrive at While I was president of automouve support. etc. In addi-

6. but that's not the way it is. Alabama Power. I had involvement Lion, we need to call on the metal-If you think back to the spring and responsibility in managing the lurgists, geologists and other of 1988. you may reccll that planning, construction. licensing specialists who also remain avail-

, Georgia Power had a vacancy in its and operation of Alabama's able to each of the other system senior nuclear executive area. nuclear facility. and I have served companies. I'm corwinced that the service company concept provides

- 7."

W 5 .77 p. ~ areQ . -

• • w a cost-effective way of managing

+ . Ai*' this expertise, and so I feel that i k. " .... ., .

E .NT i our relationship with SCS will

[ C M c["'.

..,, 4.-

C ~s- continue in its present form.

j t , 'W Q , How long would you expect plan j

l

( ;j 4 personnel to remmM employees j p.

W p' . p B*^

.g ,.;

a k

g. T

• h- . '

s' of Alabama Power and Georgia Power?

y Y . f..

, 3 ,- That decision is much too far dow:

U 9 f J . ,, t the road to say. The next major 4.a. .. .; [ ' .

e ., 5 j , -- .- - -

W' step after the corporation is formet r w3 would be the transfer of the oper-r .~ a q .

',i 3}0._ ating licenses from Alabama Power 4 q' -7~ and Georgia Power, which requires m

• 1 approvals from the Nuclear 1

9.' C Ih Regulatory Commission and all

. C,~ , plant co-owners.

The transfer of plant personnel

-T ~

would not be considered until the

]  :

last phase of our transition. Even

, ,- then, the decision conceming

(. g covered employees might be subject to contract negotiations

. s , with the union employees.

l 5 sem 92 PROJECT CON M M 0723'l6 Exhibitb ,page_S. of b

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

, Page 4 l 1 /* l i

.- . . > . m. ,  % .ai .(

1 p w-* : r . _ C .[. O ; -

- =- % ~..

~~

--,j not as senstuve to regulauon and

public opinion. So there may not

~

I.C ' . . " ' be as much to be gained from combining operations in other areas. But it is always worth our 2'[. .7 . ; 7"

[ .' ~ ~ -

.f

.C! .' ! system conducting cost benefit

+. . .. . . O ~,

- - +

- analyses in logical areas. After all.

SCS is itself the result of 7~f

--~~. , ..

Dt , ~~~* C 7,~

< U , combining funcuons better Q-, p-

j. 3 3 p performed that way. l

+ ==. s. w g ~

% , . , What are your long term goals

e. '"- 3 ' "

• • -- - + for SONOPCO? ,

l .J ~.'".y I believe we have a role to play '

nauonally. It's important that the ,

Southern electric system maintain i a position ofleadership in the l nuclear power industry. I hope )

SONOPCO will make a contribu- l

, con to that goal through its perfor-mance and through our l participauon in INPO. the l .

American Nuclear Energy Council.

l the Nuclear Uultiy Management and Resources Council and throughout the industry.

In the long tenn. I believe we may be able to look outside our system and provide services to (l 3 clients around the country. The

, SEC is aware of our possibly

< ..# looking outside tn the long term. ,

j , and we've asked the commission to l

i reservejunsdiction of that issue l I until we are ready to offer those l

) Do you think the SONOPCO successful - and I m confident services. With the expertise we i concept will have other applica- that we will -- there may be some have available in the combined

tions in our system? Do you opportunity for applying it to other nuclear organization, we will be j

perhaps see a similar structure acuvities. However, the need is not well positioned to assume a

being practical for fossil fueled pressing as it is in the nuclear nadonal role.

plants? area Fossil-fueled plants, for

, That s possible I think that if we example. are not as susceptible to Photos by Brandt Wi!Itams, prove th.n the e om ept is the need for spectahzation and are Southern Company Services.

i l Synopsis i- pube,te t m t he Pubiic A:f.ms Iepanment. SONOPCO proget. Southern Company Services. Jane Henry.

[

edpor ,\rp t n # . ry ,' '::ence

. to Sn. b (O2 $CS Birmingham I

l i

j l

i (

) 92 PROJECT l 072337 l

Exhibit ,page 9 of b

.---.