ML20235K245

Comments on SECY-87-114, Assessment of Vogtle Unit 1 Readiness Review Pilot Program. Util Agrees W/Findings, Recommendation & Conclusions Although Listed Areas Where Clarification or Editorial Corrections Noted

ML20235K245
Person / Time
Site:	Vogtle
Issue date:	06/09/1987
From:	Scherer R GEORGIA POWER CO.
To:	Stello V NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO)
Shared Package
ML20235K092	List: ML20235K088 ML20235K245
References
GN-1376, NUDOCS 8707160221
Download: ML20235K245 (4)

Text

"

- Georgia Power CompIny .

. Project ManagtmInt ,

Post Office Box 282 .

1 lJ Waynesboro, Georgia 30830 )

i. Telephone 404 724-8114 1 404 554-9961 p ^Vogtle Project j

' l i

i June 9, 1987 Mr. Victor Stello, Jr.

Executive Director for Operations j U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission d Office of Public Affairs '

l Washington, D.C. 20555 i

l Re: Vogtle Electric Generating Plant, Unit 1;'50-424- ]

l Vogtle. Unit 1 Readiness Review Pilot Program l SECY-87-114 i File: X7BD102 Log: GN-1376 1

Dear ~ Mr. Stello:

l Georgia Power Company has received your report to the Commissioners, j dated May 5,1987, assessing the pilot Readiness Review Program conducted at Vogtle Unit 1. We thank you for your courtesy in providing us with-a copy of that report and with an opportunity to comment on its contents. j As stated in your. report to the Commission, the pilot Readiness Review Program conducted at Vogtle required the expenditure ' of E substantial resources, both on our part and on the part ' of the Commission. We' strongly agree with your conclusion that the Program was worthwhile and that the expenditure of time, effort, and funds early in the ,

licensing process resulted in substantial later savings through stability, predictability, and the absence of delay. As noted in- your -

report, both Georgia Power Company. and the Commission have concluded that the success of the' Unit 1 Readiness Review effort ' warrants a continuation of the Readiness Review Program for Vogtle Unit 2, which )

is scheduled to load fuel on February 28,-1989. '

Your May 5, .1987, Assessment contains a number . of suggestions 'for-improvement in the Readiness Review effort. Some of these suggestions include: earlier NRC involvement in the planning process; on-going

, reviews, particularly in the operational. areas; parallel formatting-l with the FSAR; closer coordination of' schedules for module submission EDO - 002970 8707160221 870713 PDR ADOCK 05000424 P PDR :j :

Mr. Victor Stello, Jr. June 9, 1987 Vogtle Unit 1 Readiness Page Two l Review Pilot Program File: X7BD102 Log: GN-1376

~

j to the Commission for review; and increased emphasis on hardware and l product-oriented reviews. Most of these comments and suggestions have been the subject of previous discussions between members of your staff and GPC management. We wholeheartedly agree that the Unit 1 Pilot Program has identified a number of actions to improve and streamline the Readiness Review process. These actions will be discussed with Commission representatives during the on-going planning process for the Vogtle Unit 2 Readiness Review and, where appropriate and practical, incorporated into the Unit 2 effort.

In general, Georgia Power Company agrees with the findings, recommendations, and conclusions in SECY-87-114 " Assessment of Georgia Power Company Vogtle Unit 1 Readiness Review Pilot Program". We did identify the following areas where clarification or editorial corrections ,

are in order to prevent possible misunderstanding. The report states '

on Page 9, Section 3.a.(1) of the enclosure, in part, that most of I the 47 Level I findings impacted Vogtle Unit I hardware. Georgia Power Company's analysis shows that only about one-third of the Level I findings required correction to plant hardware. This clarification does not change the conclusion that early identification and timely resolution of problems were major benefits of the program. On Pages 11 and 12, Section 3.a.(6) of the report enclosure, the Assessment indicates that our initial estimate and actual cost of performing the necessary corrective actions was approximately $15M and $30M respectively. The l

figures referred to are actually related to the total cost of all Readiness Review Program activities and the corrective action expenditures account for only a small percentage of the total amount spent. j As noted above, our comrrents on the Assessment are, in the main, q edi torial . We are well satisfied with the results of the Readiness Review effort, believe that it is an important tool allowing us to carefully evaluate the overall readiness for operation of Vogtle Unit 1, ,

and have carried the Readiness Review concept over to Vogtle Unit 2. i l We hope you will find our comments helpful in publication of the Assessment as a NUREG. As always, Georgia Power Company is prepared to provide you with any additional information or assistance which l you may require and, if you feel it is appropriate, we are willing I to meet with the NRC or others to discuss our experience with the Readiness Review Program. If you need any additional information, please contact me or the Vice President and Vogtle Project Director, Paul D. Rice, di rectly. I can be reached at 404/526-7786. Mr. Rice can be contacted at the Vogtle Project at 404/722-7535. l I.

i I

i l

i L

F

- + c Mr. Victor Stello, Jr. June 9, 1987 Vogtle Unit 1 Readiness Page Three Review Pilot Program File: X7BD102 Log: GN-1376 Georgia Power Company is, and will remain, a responsible and responsive licensee and is dedicated to constructing and operating its nuclear facilities in the safest and most effective manner possible. We believe that the Readiness Review Program assists us in meeting these objectives, and appreciate the support given us by the Commission in developing and implementing this Program.

Very truly yours, i Ilc. [ lJ Robert W. Scherer Chairman and Chief Executive Officer PDR/CWW:jc xc: Dr. J. Nelson Grace - NRC Region II Mr. Luis Reyes - NRC Region II Mr. Marvin Sinkule - NRC Region II Mr. H. H. Livermore - NRC Region II, Vogtle Senior Resident Inspector Mr. R. E. Conway - Senior Vice President Nuclear Power, GPC J. P. O'Reilly - Senior Vice President Nuclear Operation, GPC P. D. Rice - Vice President and Vogtle Project Director, GPC l

l l

1 l

l 1

1

j;p i" ~_.i _ r\

\

"  ; i 3c __ _

." 9c.

c;'

, ' ~ , _

u .,,*  :

i .

- . n

~ - . m

~ ; -

Vs- ,.' .'i y

_. ; - r '

f s f .

- n

- i ,'t o m.

- g Q si

-q-t J ~~. n s os g V

/[

i i t m am r o l

i peC l

I, Oys5 .,

r ot rr3 r oi5 a0 l,

I. ,

Jf af2 lf l

i i

,r i oog uA i

,> ; l,

, , 3' "-irn

~

wJ t

- . cu.

l t ecC I.

' .' leecRi l

, re - t r rbD l

l Si au l i

r D leP ,

l i

cf on li

.L g ," .: . ,

t oevuot W

, -- ciN it g Vu .

en ci

.ecSi h r x .ff sa

.2 fi > , . MEU OW n o$ 1 cv s

n y .-

n -

a 2 pe 0

_ n u5 3

- n40 oe5 3 -

Cv 4 -

r A0=- a et g wn o o 8 ro P mee a d et h eG mP Ota, i

o t n e 33 ser a f

J

=

G3PA

^

11

!s .

i i1 {t{ij l41!jj1 \1 i {, \l\

~e

.  : : ; ;;H;;. ;

3 jl

_ yu t '-

j

. gA  ?- _ -

gl 2 a 4

a 0

}l e

~ _ -

.l . ,A g < e,_ .

(1 . '_

~ _.- - ,

l

' , .,E ,y'A, gj

.'('

N

^

U 7

3 2

1 J

d

b. si ns os n

o

-_- m Lll J ,, ii t n anu I, _

ro l eC l.

p Oys5 l, rr5 1, roi5 rotaf2 Jf a0 i, lf I. .

oog ruA 1,

.sJoa g8'

,;1 l cRi ecC l t

. I. -

ee s

f. .

t Siau rrbD l .

l l

I, 1,

y r DeP l n 1

% ; qc.,"- toecf vuot o g ciN it en

~

Vu cSih

. ci -

,-, r s

' . e f s rx MEUOWa

.f y* 1.

,3w . * .

d <

y n

a pe 2

0 u53

_ mn40 oe53 cv4 r At a et eg i

cwnBoo r

Pmee _

anhcGet -

gn r O ta.

o sa t n e3 3 oit G3PA l

j  !

id~_