ML18092A861
| ML18092A861 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Salem  |
| Issue date: | 10/14/1985 |
| From: | Public Service Enterprise Group |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML18092A858 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8510220319 | |
| Download: ML18092A861 (7) | |
Text
. '
. \\{-.
NUCLEAR OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE EIGHTH QUARTERLY REPORT OCTOBER 14, 1985 I
Membership:
Dr. M. B. Gottlieb, Chairman Dr. s. Levy Dr. K. c. Rogers Admiral E. P. Wilkinson Dr. W. F. Witzig
~{ ".
NUCLEAR OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE EIGHTH QUARTERLY REPORT PAGE 1 The eighth meeting of the Nuclear Oversight Committee
{NOC) of Public Service Electric and Gas Company {PSE&G) was held on September 9 and 10, 1985.
The Nuclear Oversight Committee continues to note improvement and positive trends in many areas:
o The Salem 1 long and continued operation at full power.
o The substantial reduction in man-rem exposure and in volume of radioactive waste.
o The preliminary formulation of an Integrated Living Schedule.
o The establishment by management of goals and of accountability in reaching these goals.
o The direction and leadership provided by the Vice President -
Nuclear and his active inv~lvement at all levels.
o The implementation of the Nuclear Department reorganization.
o The initiation-of a Quality Concerns Program.
o The favorable NRC-SALP for Hope Creek:
0 management involvement and controls have been a key factor in this performance. 0 Managem~nt has also p~oceeded to:
o Implement a task force to investigate the recent performance of Salem 2 and to develop a short-term availability/performance improvement program.
o Designate systems engineers assigned to Plant Operations and to initiate their training.
This program is expected to significantly improve the engineering support of plant operations.
NOC would like to review the effectiveness of this program at the March or June meeting.
o Reexamine ~he assignment of responsibilities at the Island for such emergencies as the recent inadver-
. tent release of co2 at the Hope Creek site.
- 1 i ft-'
(l.
PAGE 2 The NOC would like to receive reports of the independent investigations of this event and accounts of any action taken to centralize the responsibility for emergencies at the Island.
Action Plans The Nuclear Department has now taken formal action with the NRC to declare the Action Plans complete, and to carry out any remaining tasks as part of the continuing responsibilities of the appropriate (designated) group.
The NOC, in the seventh quarterly report, requested reviews of six of the Action Plans.
2.1.3 Nuclear Department Policy Manual and Support Procedures The NOC had no problem with the shift to QA assessment but questioned whether this assessment should be delayed to mid-1986 as compared with the original date of November 1985.
In response, PSE&G pointed out that many of the new policies were not put into effect until July 1985, as compared with the original target of November 1984.
Thus, they felt it would not be possible to perform the follow up assessment by May 1985, the original target, but did agree to move the assessment forward to March 1986.
The NOC agrees that this is a reasonable step in light of the major changes being made by the Vice President - Nuclear.
2.2.1 Safety Review Management The NOC has been concerned about the delay in implementation of this plan, originally scheduled for completion in August 1984, due, as previously described to NOC, to difficulties in acquiring staff: At this meeting, the NOC was pleased to find that the new General Manager - Nuclear Safety Review, appointed in 1984, has acquired the full complement of Salem staff members; that the new Off-Site Review Group had, as planned, taken over for the old NRB; and that the On-Site Review Group was also functioning.
One major task undertaken by the Off-Site Review Group was a safety review of the 449 deleted Design Change Requests (OCR).
None of these deletions was found to have significant safety impact *. Forty-five were found to have potential associated regulatory commitments.
Fifty-five required more
PAGE 3 information to ensure review completeness, although they did not appear to have safety implications.
Obviously more work is required here.
Later, the present staff of the Off-Site Review Group is to be augmented by four more Hope Creek staff members (see item 11 in the section on Recommendations and Findings)
- 2.2.2 Commitment Identification, Tracking, and Closeout The target date for development of consolidated commitment program procedures and training was December 1984.
A basic tracking system is now in place.
It is not a fully consolidated system, but it does track NRC and NJDEP commitments and some others.
Additional functions will be added as the system is expanded.
2.4.4 Site Protection and Emergency Preparedness The new Nuclear Emergency Preparedness Manager detailed the recent progress in establishing procedures for Emergency Planning Deficiency/
Revision tracking and in establishing training programs.
Implementation, originally scheduled for October 1984, was accomplished earlier this year.
Follow-up assessment and report of conclusions, originally scheduled for May 1985, is now regarded as a continuing function.
2.6.2 Maintenance Planning, Monitoring and Control As originally envisaged, this task was to be accomplished* by means of a very large computerized Managed Maintenance Information System, which would perform in an integrated fashion work order and inspection order tracking, a master equipment list, NPRDS data, spare parts list, monitoring, control, etc.
The magnitude of the task, originally scheduled for completion in May 1985, was not fully understood.
The new schedule calls for completion by the end of 1987.
Meanwhile, an interim system has been set in place, whereby the individual tasks enumerated above can be carried out in a non-inte-grated manner, i.e., with manual interfaces.
This step represents a* workable system for the interim.
I
I I
PAGE 4 2.6.3 Backlogged Maintenance Work Items 2.6.4 Maintenance, Calibration, and Control of Measuring and Test Equipment Mr. P. J. White was appointed Manager -
Salem Maintenance only a few days before this meeting.
Therefore, he was not in a position to address many
- of the NOC questions.
The backlog, which in 1984 was reduced to an acceptable level, has once more increased.
Mr. White has created a goal of less than 1,000 for the Maint~nance Department.
This goal is very ambitious in light of a backlog of about 2,400 maintenance work orders and about 600 I&C work orders (not including about 1,000 inspection orders).
This whole area should be discussed at the next NOC meeting.
2.7.3 Information Sy~tems The original plan called for completion by January 1987 of a very massive integrated Management Information System.
The requirements were scaled down (NOC agreed that this was necessary and proper) about a year ago.
The pr~sent schedule calls for completion in May 1988.
Meanwhile, an interim plan has been put into place and is being modified and improved continually.
Appropriately, the task has been placed outside the Action Plan.
Engineering The assignment of the 25 Salem Station system engineers shows promise of increasing substantially the effectiveness of engineering support for the station.
An extensive training program has been designed for these system engi-neers, so the system will not be truly functional until spring or sum~er of 1986.
Review of the backlogged DCR/DCP's has cancelled or deferred 449 to bring the level down to one that is regarded as realistic for the next year, namely 234.
This number is expected to fully occupy engineering resources.
It had been stated that no DCR's with safety implications had been cancelled or deferred.
The NOC, as a test of the change control process, asked for an in-depth review of the next 15 DCP's that would have been included had the number 234 been increased.
As a result of this review, none of the 15 was found to have significant ~afety implications but three were found to affect regulatory commitments.
These will be reexamined.
As a further check, NOC asked how many of the cancelled DCR/DCP's had originally been
PAGE 5 classified as Priority I.
The answer was that 11% of the 449 cancelled or deferred were originally so classified.
The explanation offered was that the priority assignment in the old system was applied in most cases by the sponsor engineer, who might have been overzealous in promoting his idea.
In other cases, some DCR's were incorporated into later changes and the follow-up did not weed them out.
However, these items were not documented.
Man-Rem and Radioactive Waste Reduction Program The ALARA goal was reduced-from 250 man-rem to 200 in August.
This would be lower than previously achieved by other plants of this size.
The total radwaste generation for the two Salem units is expected to be less than 15,000 cubic feet, which compares favorably with the industry average of 15,000 cubic. feet per single PWR unit and certainly represents a substantial improvement over the 54,000 cubic feet generated in 1984 by the Salem units.
Salem Plant Tour The NOC toured Salem Units 1 and 2.
They found that both were very clean in appearance.
There were some flammable substances observed which were not properly stored, and one pipe was observed to be vibrating with an amplitud~ of about an inch--suff icient to cause NOC conc~rn.
Findings and Recommendations
- 1.
As stated earlier, substantial improvements in organization and in assignment of responsibility are evident.
- 2.
The NOC concurs with the decision to formally close out the Action Plans.
- 3.
The NOC will continue to monitor the implementation of the former Action Plans.
- 4.
Documentation is needed on cancelled or deferred DCR/DCP's which formerly were designated as Priority I.
- 5.
The uncertainties in the case of 45 DCR's as to whether NRC commitments may be involved, and the 55 cases requiring more information to resolve questions of possible safety implications:
these uncertainties should be resolved promptly.
- I I
J
I
-. ~
I
'-.) ~ :_
PAGE 6
- 6.
Reviews of the Action Plans showed that resource requirements are still being developed and refined.
Typical items in this category are the integrated Living Schedule, the Management Information System, and the engineering support of the DCR's.
PSE&G management is working to develop a match between resources and needs, and the NOC urges the early resolution of the matter.
-7.
The NOC has not had the opportunity to review the INPO findings, the reason for their increased number, and the large percentage of repeat findings.
PSE&G is vigorously implementing a program to correct this situation.
The NOC wishes to review these INPO findings and the corrective actipns at the next meeting.
- 8.
The NRC commitment tracking system needs improve-
- ment, particularly in terms of completeness, LER tracking, etc.
- 9.
The backlog of maintenance and I&C jobs is too large.
While the management objective of reducing these numbers was clear, there were no explicit mechanisms discussed at this meeting to achieve this objective.
The NOC looks forward to further discussions at the next meeting.
l_O. There has been slippage in meeting Action Plan schedules.
The NOC realizes that, by and large, this slippage is justified, but wishes that the managers, in describing their programs, had been more forthright in acknowledging and discussing these delays.
- 11. It is recommended that the Off-Site Review Group be brought up to full strength as soon as practical by adding the additional four personnel to support Hope.Creek, sooner than previously planned.
- 12. In recent months, Salem 2 has experienced five LER's due to personnel errors.
Management has set up a task force to investigate this series of errors.
The NOC would like to review the findings of this task force at the next meeting.
-