ML18093B487
| ML18093B487 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Salem  |
| Issue date: | 03/03/1989 |
| From: | Miltenberger S Public Service Enterprise Group |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM) |
| References | |
| NLR-N89030, NUDOCS 8903140641 | |
| Download: ML18093B487 (3) | |
Text
Public Service Electric and Gas Company teven E. Miltenberger ce President anc Cruef Nuc1ear O!ker Public Service Electric and Gas Company P.O. Box 236. Hancocks Bridge. NJ 08038 609-339-4 ~ 99 MAR 0 S 1989 NLR-N89030 United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555
- Gentleinen:
COMBINED INSPECTION REPORT 50-272/88-80 AND 50-311/88-80 SALEM GENERATING STATION In accordance with your letter dated January 18, 1989, transmitting the subject inspection report, please find enclosed our response to your concerns and the requested completion dates for Items B and c in Appendix A of your February 25, 1987 letter.
Per discussions with Mr. N. Blumberg of your staff, the submittal date for this response was adjusted to March ~' 1989.
Should you have any questions with regard to this transmittal, please do not hesitate to contact us.
Sincerely, Enclosure C Mr. J. c. Stone, Licensing Project Manager
/
(
Ms. K. Halvey Gibson, Senior Resident Inspector Mr. w. T. Russell, Administrator Region I Ms. J. Moon, Interim Chief New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection Division of Environmental Quality Bureau of Nuclear Engineering CN 415 Tre~ton, NJ 08625 I
r" I
'-.---f I
ENCLOSURE COMBINED INSPECTION REPORT 50-272/88-80 AND 50-311/88-80 SALEM GENERATING STATION A.
OVERALL CONCERN REGARDING MANAGEMENT INVOLVEMENT, CONTROL AND ATTENTION TO DETAIL A high level of management involvement, control and attention to detail in the design change and modification process has been, and continues to be one of PSE&G's primary engineering objectives.
Over the past two years we have taken strong and effective action in support of our commitment to excellence in the engineering support we provide to our operating plants.
A comprehensive reorganiza-tion of the Engineering and Plant Betterment (E&PB) Depart-ment was implemented in January of 1988.
An improved design change control process was also initiated at that time.
The new process emphasizes design interfaces, supervisory review, specialty review and, as required, verification.
Training was conducted with an examination to ensure that engineers and designers can implement the revised process successfully.
As our engineering personnel continue to develop and mature in their responsibilities, we have observed an improvement in the overall quality of our engineering work and specific improvement in the quality of our 50.59 reviews.
The improvement in our 50.59 reviews is documented in the evaluations provided quarterly to the Nuclear Oversight Committee (NOC) by the Offsite Safety Review (OSR) Depart-ment.
We are confident that this trend of gradual improve-ment will continue.
Our commitment to excellence has led us to seek informed, professional assistance and advice even in areas that have demonstrated gradual improvement.
On October 11, 1988, the Manager - Offsite Safety Review initiated a third party assessment of the 50.59 process.
This in-depth, objective appraisal concluded that the process in use meets regulatory requirements.
The report also identified areas for improve-ment that were not readily discernible to those personnel involved in the process.
Specific recommendations from the assessment are presently being evaluated for implementation by OSR in concert with the appropriate engineering managers.
In r~sponse to your specific concerns regarding the design change and modification process, the General Manager -
E&PB discussed the subject inspection report with his managers, stressing the seriousness of the observations as they relate to management responsibilities.
He reaffirmed his objectives of continuous improvement both in the quality of the engi-neering product and in the processes employed.
He strongly emphasized that additional attention to detail is required to prevent the recurrence of inconsistencies and omissions as described in the report.
This emphasis on additional atten-tion to detail was subsequently communicated throughout the E&PB organization.
The General Manager -
E&PB established a pro tem weekly meeting with his direct reports to review design change packages (DCPs) prior to SORC submittal.
The purpose of this review is to verify that his instructions in this regard have been properly communicated and implemented.
E&PB has also initiated an in-house, INPO-type observation and engineering assurance process designed to identify and
- evaluate patterns of errors of a minor nature that collec-tively may indicate issues that require additional management attention.
This program, combined with the routine QA audits of our engineering processes, will assist us in further refining our design change process.
We believe that a proper planning cycle is a prerequisite for achieving a high degree of quality in a product.
As part of the Nuclear Department Business Plan for 1989 -
1993, we have developed a plan which applies this belief to the design change and modification process.
We are currently developing an implementation plan which will enable us to identify major DCP work at least one year prior to the start of refueling/
maintenance outages.
This decompression of the DCP cycle is intended to achieve an even higher degree of quality in modifications to the facility.
We are clearly in alignment with your overall expectations regarding management involvement, control and attention to detail in the design change and modification process.
We have, and will continue to strive for excellence and supe-rior quality in both the product and service provided by the E&PB organization.
B.
ITEMS B AND C IN APPENDIX A TO 2/25/87 LETTER The corrective actions for these items will be completed by July 31, 1989.