ML18093B354: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
← Older editNewer edit →
VisualWikitext
Created page by program invented by StriderTol
Created page by program invented by StriderTol
Line 14: Line 14:
| page count = 3
| page count = 3
}}
}}
See also: [[followed by::IR 05000272/1988019]]


=Text=
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:**** Public Service Electric and Gas Company Stanley LaBruna . Public Service Electric and Gas Company P.O. Box 236, Hancocks Bridge, NJ 08038 609-339-4800  
{{#Wiki_filter:**** Public Service Electric and Gas Company Stanley LaBruna . Public Service Electric and Gas Company P.O. Box 236, Hancocks Bridge, NJ 08038 609-339-4800 Vice President  
Vice President  
-Nuclear Operations DEC 2 7 1988 NLR-N88210 United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555 Gentlemen:
-Nuclear Operations  
RESPONSE TO COMBINED INSPECTION REPORT AND 50-311/88-20 . SALEM.GENERATING STATION UNIT NOS. 1 AND 2 DOCKET NOS.
DEC 2 7 1988 NLR-N88210  
AND 50-311 Public Service Electric and Gas Company (PSE&G) hereby submits its response to the concerns presented in Section 7 of the . subject inspection .report. PSE&G's assessment of these concerns and its intended corrective actions are presented in. the Attachment.
United States Nuclear Regulatory  
PSE&G concurs with the inspectors finding that management attention and action is needed to resolve these concerns.
Commission  
As such, PSE&G management is taking prompt and comprehensive action in this regard and will continue to access theeffectiveness of these actions until these concerns are eliminated.
Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555 Gentlemen:  
Should you have any questions concerning this response, please contact us. Sincerely, Attachment 3 3 Document Control Desk c Mr. w. T. Russell, Administrator Region I Mr. J. C. Stone Licensing Project Manager Ms. K. Halvey-Gibson Senior Resident Inspector Ms. J .. Moon, Interim Chief. Bureau of Nuclear Engineering CN 415* Trenton, NJ 08625 DEC 2 'l 1988 ATTACHMENT RESPONSE TO SECTION 7 CONCERNS In section 7 of Inspect-ion -Report 50-272/88-19 arid 50-311/88.;.20 the inspector presented  
RESPONSE TO COMBINED INSPECTION  
*multiple examples of problems associated with procedures at Salem. These problems have been identified both by the inspector and by PSE&G. By themselves, these problems, would not represent a significant concern; However, in the aggregate  
REPORT  
*these examples demonstrate a weakness in the *implementation of procedures at Salem. These problems, along . with the inspectors stated observations (which infer" that personnel are not familiar with procedure implementation*
AND 50-311/88-20 . SALEM.GENERATING  
requirements and that confusion exists as to how these requirements should be implemented in the field), indicate that management needs to reassess its methods of communicating the implementation requirements and ensuring that these.requirements are met. PSE&G has reviewed the issues concerning procedure usage.and implementation.
STATION UNIT NOS. 1 AND 2 DOCKET NOS.  
PSE&G's assessment of the examples in section 7 indicates a need on PSE&G's part to provide a clearer understanding of the importance of procedure adherence to all levels . of the work force.*. PSE&G' s plans for providing this direction is detailed below.
AND 50-311 Public Service Electric and Gas Company (PSE&G) hereby submits its response to the concerns presented  
* A project plan t_o improve the station technical procedures has been developed.
in Section 7 of the . subject inspection .report. PSE&G's assessment  
This plan will address development of a computerized data base for procedures, use of human factors from the Technical Procedure Writer's Guide, verification and validation of the procedures to ensure technical accuracy prior to use, a cross reference of procedure revisions to industry operating experience, and a cross reference of procedures to plant configuration.
of these concerns and its intended corrective  
The Technical Specification Surveillance upgrade program will enhance PSE&G's performance with regard to the issues of "missed surveillances", identi-fied in the report. This program was described in PSE&G's response to inspection reports 50-272/88-14 and 50-311/88-14, and 50-272/88-17 and 50-311/88-17 dated September 2, 1988 and November 18, .1988 respectively. . . Management will clarify and communicate its expectations on procedure use and adherence to all station and support personnel.
actions are presented  
This position will also be stressed through all levels of management and will be completed by January 6, 1989. In addition, a written plan will be developed to address all areas of concern including management direction, supervisory guidance, etc. for procedure use and adherence.
in. the Attachment.  
This plan will include items such as: training, retraining, cultural change awareness, supervisory accountability, and QA/QC involvement.
PSE&G concurs with the inspectors  
The plan will be developed for implementation by February, 1989.}}
finding that management  
attention  
and action is needed to resolve these concerns.  
As such, PSE&G management  
is taking prompt and comprehensive  
action in this regard and will continue to access theeffectiveness  
of these actions until these concerns are eliminated.  
Should you have any questions  
concerning  
this response, please contact us. Sincerely, Attachment  
3 3
Document Control Desk -2 -c Mr. w. T. Russell, Administrator  
Region I Mr. J. C. Stone Licensing  
Project Manager Ms. K. Halvey-Gibson  
Senior Resident Inspector  
Ms. J .. Moon, Interim Chief. Bureau of Nuclear Engineering  
CN 415* Trenton, NJ 08625 DEC 2 'l 1988
ATTACHMENT  
RESPONSE TO SECTION 7 CONCERNS In section 7 of Inspect-ion -Report 50-272/88-19  
arid 50-311/88.;.20  
the inspector  
presented  
*multiple  
examples of problems associated  
with procedures  
at Salem. These problems have been identified  
both by the inspector  
and by PSE&G. By themselves, these problems, would not represent  
a significant  
concern; However, in the aggregate  
*these examples demonstrate  
a weakness in the *implementation  
of procedures  
at Salem. These problems, along . with the inspectors  
stated observations (which infer" that personnel  
are not familiar with procedure  
implementation*  
requirements  
and that confusion  
exists as to how these requirements  
should be implemented  
in the field), indicate that management  
needs to reassess its methods of communicating  
the implementation  
requirements  
and ensuring that these.requirements  
are met. PSE&G has reviewed the issues concerning  
procedure  
usage.and  
implementation.  
PSE&G's assessment  
of the examples in section 7 indicates  
a need on PSE&G's part to provide a clearer understanding  
of the importance  
of procedure  
adherence  
to all levels . of the work force.*. PSE&G' s plans for providing  
this direction  
is detailed below. * A project plan t_o improve the station technical  
procedures  
has been developed.  
This plan will address development  
of a computerized  
data base for procedures, use of human factors from the Technical  
Procedure  
Writer's Guide, verification  
and validation  
of the procedures  
to ensure technical  
accuracy prior to use, a cross reference  
of procedure  
revisions  
to industry operating  
experience, and a cross reference  
of procedures  
to plant configuration.  
The Technical  
Specification  
Surveillance  
upgrade program will enhance PSE&G's performance  
with regard to the issues of "missed surveillances", identi-fied  
in the report. This program was described  
in PSE&G's response to inspection  
reports 50-272/88-14  
and 50-311/88-14, and 50-272/88-17  
and 50-311/88-17  
dated September  
2, 1988 and November 18, .1988 respectively. . . Management  
will clarify and communicate  
its expectations  
on procedure  
use and adherence  
to all station and support personnel.  
This position will also be stressed through all levels of management  
and will be completed  
by January 6, 1989. In addition, a written plan will be developed  
to address all areas of concern including  
management  
direction, supervisory  
guidance, etc. for procedure  
use and adherence.  
This plan will include items such as: training, retraining, cultural change awareness, supervisory  
accountability, and QA/QC involvement.  
The plan will be developed  
for implementation  
by February, 1989.
}}

Revision as of 20:00, 31 July 2019

Responds to Concerns Noted in Insp Repts 50-272/88-19 & 50-311/88-20.Corrective Actions:Project Plan to Address Development of Computerized Data Base for Procedures & Use of Human Factors from Writers Guide Initiated
ML18093B354
Person / Time
Site: Salem  
Issue date: 12/27/1988
From: Labruna S
Public Service Enterprise Group
To:
NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION & RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (ARM)
References
NLR-N88210, NUDOCS 8901030302
Download: ML18093B354 (3)
v • d • e


Text

        • Public Service Electric and Gas Company Stanley LaBruna . Public Service Electric and Gas Company P.O. Box 236, Hancocks Bridge, NJ 08038 609-339-4800 Vice President

-Nuclear Operations DEC 2 7 1988 NLR-N88210 United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555 Gentlemen:

RESPONSE TO COMBINED INSPECTION REPORT AND 50-311/88-20 . SALEM.GENERATING STATION UNIT NOS. 1 AND 2 DOCKET NOS.

AND 50-311 Public Service Electric and Gas Company (PSE&G) hereby submits its response to the concerns presented in Section 7 of the . subject inspection .report. PSE&G's assessment of these concerns and its intended corrective actions are presented in. the Attachment.

PSE&G concurs with the inspectors finding that management attention and action is needed to resolve these concerns.

As such, PSE&G management is taking prompt and comprehensive action in this regard and will continue to access theeffectiveness of these actions until these concerns are eliminated.

Should you have any questions concerning this response, please contact us. Sincerely, Attachment 3 3 Document Control Desk c Mr. w. T. Russell, Administrator Region I Mr. J. C. Stone Licensing Project Manager Ms. K. Halvey-Gibson Senior Resident Inspector Ms. J .. Moon, Interim Chief. Bureau of Nuclear Engineering CN 415* Trenton, NJ 08625 DEC 2 'l 1988 ATTACHMENT RESPONSE TO SECTION 7 CONCERNS In section 7 of Inspect-ion -Report 50-272/88-19 arid 50-311/88.;.20 the inspector presented

  • multiple examples of problems associated with procedures at Salem. These problems have been identified both by the inspector and by PSE&G. By themselves, these problems, would not represent a significant concern; However, in the aggregate
  • these examples demonstrate a weakness in the *implementation of procedures at Salem. These problems, along . with the inspectors stated observations (which infer" that personnel are not familiar with procedure implementation*

requirements and that confusion exists as to how these requirements should be implemented in the field), indicate that management needs to reassess its methods of communicating the implementation requirements and ensuring that these.requirements are met. PSE&G has reviewed the issues concerning procedure usage.and implementation.

PSE&G's assessment of the examples in section 7 indicates a need on PSE&G's part to provide a clearer understanding of the importance of procedure adherence to all levels . of the work force.*. PSE&G' s plans for providing this direction is detailed below.

  • A project plan t_o improve the station technical procedures has been developed.

This plan will address development of a computerized data base for procedures, use of human factors from the Technical Procedure Writer's Guide, verification and validation of the procedures to ensure technical accuracy prior to use, a cross reference of procedure revisions to industry operating experience, and a cross reference of procedures to plant configuration.

The Technical Specification Surveillance upgrade program will enhance PSE&G's performance with regard to the issues of "missed surveillances", identi-fied in the report. This program was described in PSE&G's response to inspection reports 50-272/88-14 and 50-311/88-14, and 50-272/88-17 and 50-311/88-17 dated September 2, 1988 and November 18, .1988 respectively. . . Management will clarify and communicate its expectations on procedure use and adherence to all station and support personnel.

This position will also be stressed through all levels of management and will be completed by January 6, 1989. In addition, a written plan will be developed to address all areas of concern including management direction, supervisory guidance, etc. for procedure use and adherence.

This plan will include items such as: training, retraining, cultural change awareness, supervisory accountability, and QA/QC involvement.

The plan will be developed for implementation by February, 1989.

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML18093B354&oldid=1870990"