ML18100A398
| ML18100A398 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Salem, Hope Creek  |
| Issue date: | 05/27/1993 |
| From: | Stephen Dembek, Stone J Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| TAC-M85899, TAC-M85900, TAC-M85901, NUDOCS 9306070390 | |
| Download: ML18100A398 (8) | |
Text
.
-. e UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 May 27' 1993.
Docket Nos. 50-272, 50-311 and 50-354 LICENSEE:
Public Service Electric.and Gas Company {PSE&G}
FACILITY:
Salem Nuclear Generating Station, Units 1 and 2, and Hope Creek Generating Station
SUBJECT:
INTEGRATED SCHEDULE PROGRAM (TAC NOS. M85899,* M85900, AND M85901}
On May 11, 1993, the PSE&G staff met with the NRC staff to discuss the Integrated Schedule Prrigram (ISP).
The ISP is designed to integrate regulatory requested or required items with PSE&G developed initiatives as detailed in the application from PSE&G dated February 26, 1993.
- Background In a 'letter dated February 26, 1993, PSE&G proposed to implement an ISP at Salem and Hope Creek.
The proposed ISP is based on the Policy Statement issued by the NRC on September 23, 1992 (57 FR 43886).
This is the first application for an ISP that has been received since the policy statement was issued.
The meeting was held at the Artificial Island Processing Center, located on the site of Salem and Hope Creek.
Summary The ISP as proposed by PSE&G will be used to track major, non-routine engineering projects. The meeting was held for the purpose of clarifying, for the NRC staff, the information contained in the February 26, 1993, request for approval of the ISP.
The PSE&G staff responded to questions posed by the NRC staff. The major topics that were discussed are summarized below.
Threshold:
The threshold for projects to be included in the.ISP is
$50,000 or 1000 p-erson-hours.
- PSE&G will reconsider this to see if it would be appropriate to increase the dollar value of the threshold.
Not
. all items are included in the ISP.
Only those items, including regulatory required or requested items, that meet the threshold limits are included.
A question was asked if provisions had b~en made to include in the IS~
individual safety significant items that are below the threshold values, but when consolidated are above the threshold value. The response was that there is no mechanism in place to consolidate individual items, so these i terns wi 11 not a pp-ear as part of the ISP.
However, the ISP is a subset of the Action Tracking System which is the system that would track such i terns individually.
. ~f o\\
- fib ~*rJ ~ ~~w~~
~~1;fi~*fil:liP 93_0527-~----":
~.1lii1 rj~~&k ~~~'t:ffitl i~ ~iJ~\\ ~~hl"' N
(-C~~b~ggta. 05Q0~~l? **
\\ \\
e e Prioritization: Because prioritization plays *an important role in the ISP, a description of the methods used for priori~ization was presented.
Every proposal is independently scored by four man~gers, Salem Operations Manager, Hope Creek Operations Manager, Manager Nuclear Engineering Design, and.the General Manager Quality Assurance and Nuclear Safety Review.
There are nine factors that are scored and each factor is then weighted (see Enclo-sure 1 for the scoring factors and the weighting factors). There are also internal guidelines that ha~e been issued to assist the scorers. The results must agree within 20% from high to lQw.
If they do not, a ~escoring i~ done in a face-to-face setting.
In addition, the sponsor can request a rescoring if the scores are lower than expected.
In addition to the scoring process~ there are two mechanisms for ensuring the item is included in the ISP.
One is the executive override and the other is an adder that is included with a regulatory required item.
Either one will generally force the item to be included in the ISP, regardless of the prioritization scores.
The factors that are used to arrive at the priorities and the weighting factors are reviewed every year and changes made as necessary. There have not been any changes since the program began ca. 1990.
The following is a summary of specific topics discussed concerning the February 26, 1993, application and.the results:.
I.* When a n_ew request is* received from the NRC, any impact on currently scheduled items will be included in the response. *If, for example, the implementation of a new regulatory request that is applicable to the Hope Creek Station impacts the implementation of a previously scheduled item at Salem, th~t information should be included in the response to the Hope Creek request.
- 2.
The amount of detail required to justify the delay in implementation of an item will be handled on a case-by-case basis, usually by discussing the issue with the appropriate NRR project manager.
- 3. Environmental issues that are the responsibility ~f the NRC will be coded as N2.
- 4.
The notification procedure as contained in the February 26, 1993 application, included a verbal notification for changes to N2 items with a due date that is before the next semi-annual update. All other changes to the due dates for N2 items would be included and justified in the semi-
- annual updates.. The staff does not agree that this is an acceptable*
- mechanism for approval of changes to the due date for N2 items. Requests for changes in the due date for N2 items should be in writing, apart from the semi-annual update, and should be submitted when the change is identified.
'. 5.
On page 8 of the ISP Policy Statement, there is a section titled "Regulator Interface" that discusses responses to regulatory agencies.
Included is a discussion of the 90-day negative consent period but it does not exempt the items coded as Nl from the 90-day negative consent period.
PSE&G will review this statement.
- 6.
Once the ISP is approved, initial responses to NRC requests, i.e.,
bulletins and generic letters, will fall under the 90-day negative consent allowance.
- 7.
The application proposes to submit updates to the schedules on a semi-annual basis.
PSE&G will reconsider the frequency of updates and the format of the update report.
- 8.
The schedules included in the application did not show any security-related work items. This prompted a question about the completeness of the schedule.
PSE&G will review the status of the security modifications and determine if they should have been on the schedule. contains a list of personnel who were in attendance at the meeting.
/S/
Stephen Dembek, Project Manager Project Directorate I-2 Division of Reactor Projects - I/II Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Enclosures:
- 1.
Priority Score Sheet
- 2.
Meeting Attendees cc w/enclosures:
See next page DISTRIBUTION cD.ocke_t E-i 1 e--
NRC & LocaT"'PDRs PDI-2 Reading TMurley/FMiraglia JPartlow OGC EJordan MBoyle JDonohew ACRS(lO)
/S/
James C. Stone, Senior Project Manager Project Directorate I-2 Division of Reactor Projects - I/II Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation SVarga JCalvo CMi 11 er JStone VMcCree, EDO, 17G-21 EWenzinger, RGN-I JWhite, RGN-I TJohnson, RGN-I SDembek MO'Brien OFFICE PDI-2/PM DATE
- Jfr /93 5 /d)/93 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY DOCUMENT NAME:
SAS-12.MTS 5' I ~/93 5 ;i1;93
. r 5.
On page 8 of the ISP Policy Statement, there is~ settion titled "Requl ator Interface" that discusses responses to regulatory agenci e*s.
Included is a discussion of the 90-day negative consent period but it does not exempt the items coded as Nl from the 90-day negative.consent period.
PSE&G will review this statement.
- 6.
Once the ISP is approved, initial responses to NRC requests, i.e.,
bulletins and generic letters, will fal1 under the 90-day negative consent allowance.
- 7.
The applic_ation proposes to submit updates to the schedules on a semi-annual basis.
PSE&G will reconsider the frequency of updates ~nd the format of the updat~ report~
- 8.
The schedules included in the application did not show any security-related work items. This prompted a question about the completeness of the schedule.
PSE&G will review the status of the security modifications and determine if they should have been on the schedule. contains a list of personnel who were in attendance at the meeting~
&_o!J~.
Stephen Dembek, Project Manager Project Directorate I-2 Division of Reactor Projects - I/II Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Enclosures:
- 1.
Priority Score Sheet
- 2.
Meeting Attendees.
cc w/enclosures:
See next page James C. Stone, Senior Project Manager Project Directorate 1-2 Division of Reactor Projects - ILll Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Public Service Electric & Gas Company cc:
Mark J. Wetterhahn, Esquire Winston & Strawn 1400 L Street NW Washington, DC 20005-3502 Richard Fryling, Jr., Esquire Law Department - Tower SE 80 Park Place Newark, NJ 07101 Mr. Calvin A. Vondra General Manager -
Sal~m Operations Salem Generating Station*
P.O. Box 236 Hancocks Bridge, NJ 08038 Mr. J. Hagan Vice President - Nuclear Operations Nuclear Department P.O. Box 236 Hancocks Bridge, New Jersey 08038 Mr. Thomas P.*Johnson, Senior Resident
- inspector Salem Generating Station U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
- Drawer I Hancocks Bridge, NJ 08038 Dr. Jill Lipoti, Asst. Director Radiation Prot'ection Programs NJ Department of Environmental Protection and Energy CN 415 Trenton, NJ 08625-0415 Maryland People's Counsel American Building, 9th Floor 231 East Baltimore Street Baltimore, Maryland 21202 Mr. J. T. Robb, Director Joint Owners Affairs Philadelphia Electric Company 955 Chesterbrook Blvd~, 51A-13 Wayne, PA 19087 Salem Nuclear Generating Station, Units 1 and 2, and Hope Creek Generating Station Richard Hartung Electric Service Evaluation Board of Regulatory.. Commissioners
-2 Gateway Center, Tenth Floor Newark, NJ 07102 Regional Administrator, Region I U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 475 Allendale Road King of Prussia, PA. 19406 Lower Alloways Creek Township c/o Mary 0. Henderson, Clerk Municipal Building, P.O. Box 157 Hancocks Bridg~, NJ 08038 Mr. Frank X. Thomson, Jr., Manager Licensing and Regulation Nuclear Department P.O. Box 236 Hancocks Bridge, NJ 08038.
Mr. David Wersan Assistant Consumer Advocate Office of.Consumer Advocate 1425 Strawberry Square Harrisburg, PA 17120 Mr. J. A. Isabella MGR. - Generation Department Atlantic Electric Company P.O. Box 1500 1199 Bl~ck Horse Pike Pleasant~ille, NJ 08232 Carl D. Schaefer External Operations - Nuclear Delmarva Power & Light Company P.O. Box 231 Wilmington, DE 19899 Public Service Commission of Maryland.
Engineering Division ATTN:
Chief Engineer 231 E. Baltimore Street.
- Baltimore, MD 21202-3486
Public Service Electric & Gas Company cc:
Hope Creek Resident Inspector U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Drawer I Hancocks Bridge, ~ew Jersey 08038 Mr. R. Hovey General Manager - Hope Creek Operations Hope Creek Generating Station P.O. Box 236 Hancocks Bridge, New Jersey 08038 Mr. Steven E. Miltenberger Vice President and Chief Nuclear Officer Public Service Electric Gas Company Post Office Box 236 Hancocks Bridge, New Jersey 08038 2 -
Salem Nucl~ar Generating Station, Unit 1 and 2, and Hope Creek Generating Station*
~C.:-i A-AP.ZZ-0065-29 e
ENCLOSURE 1
,o PRIORITY SCORE SHEET PllOll'l'Y SCOU-SmT WORK ITEM NAME I
i -:
ioiORK I':'E..'i NO.
CATE NAME OF SCORER Indicate below by an % on the scale the degree to which this work item is necessary to improve or maintain each motivation.
Bot A
TO A TO A I
JIO'!':InTlgll At llDIDD.L XODDAH SJ:GllD'J:Oft USOLU'RLYI (wEIG,..T 1AJ(, F'A~~)ui AJIODB'.r DBGJlBB DBGJUIB DcilsSllY I
~
I
- 1. NUCLEAR 0
2 3
4 5
6 7
a 9
10 I
SAFETY
! -~
(100). -
- 2. PERSONNEL 0
1
- 2.
3 4
5 6
7 a
9 10 SAFETY/ALARA (h'c))
- 3. NON-NUCLEAR 0
- l 2
J 4
5 6
7 a
9 10 ENVIRONMENT
- _(soJ
- 4. HUMAN 0
l 2
J 4
5 6
7 8
9 10 CLIMATi
. (sD)
- s. PLANT AVAIL.a l
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 RELIABILITY (40)
I
. DEPT.
- 6. EFFICIENCY/ o l
2
.3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10 EFFECTIVENESS i
(4o)
- 7. WORK FORCE 0
l 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9*
10 CAPABJLITY I
j*
(3.S:
- a. COST 0
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8*
9 10 EFFECTIVENESS I
~~)
I
- 9. PUBLIC 0
l 2
J 4
5 6
7 8
9 10 IMAGE (10)
YB8 BO IS THIS WORK ITEK A SPECIFIC REGULATORY I
I I
REQUIREMENT OR A REGUIATORY COMMITMENT?
NUCLEAR COMMON Page 1or1 Rev. 1
r MEETING ATTENDEES INTEGRATED SCHEDULE PROGRAM MEETING MAY 12, 1993 NAME.
ORGANIZATION
- s. Dembek NRC J. Stone NRC
- c. Mill er NRC M. Boyle NRC J. Donohew NRC E. Wenzinger NRC/RGN-I T. Johnson NRC/RGN-I R. Brown PSE&G D. Mclaughlin PSE&G P. White PSE&G F. Thomson PSE&G
- c. Lambert PSE&G P. Duke
. PSE&G J. Priest PSE&G
- s. LaBruna
- PSE&G T. Kolesnik NJ DEPE/BNE ENCLOSURE 2