ML18093A836: Difference between revisions
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
||
Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
=Text= | =Text= | ||
{{#Wiki_filter:Public Service Electric and Gas Company Steven E. Miltenberger | {{#Wiki_filter:Public Service Electric and Gas Company Steven E. Miltenberger Public Service Electric and Gas Company P.O. Box 236, Hancocks Bridge, NJ 08038 609 339-4199 Vice President - | ||
Nuclear Operations May 19, 1988 NLR-N88077 United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555 Gentlemen: | |||
REPLY TO NOTICE OF VIOLATION NRC INSPECTION REPORT NOS. 50-272/88-09, 50-311/88-09 AND 50-3 54/88-07 SALEM AND HOPE CREEK GENERATING STATIONS FACILTY OPERATING LICENSE NOS. DPR-70, DPR-75 AND NPF-57 Public Service Electric and Gas Company (PSE&G) is in receipt of your April 20,1988 letter which transmitted a Notice of Violation | |||
* concerning a failure to comply with Technical Specification | |||
REPLY TO NOTICE OF VIOLATION NRC INSPECTION REPORT NOS. 50-272/88-09, 50-311/88-09 AND 50-3 54/88-07 SALEM AND HOPE CREEK GENERATING STATIONS FACILTY OPERATING LICENSE NOS. DPR-70, DPR-75 AND NPF-57 Public Service Electric and Gas Company (PSE&G) is in receipt of your April 20,1988 letter which transmitted a Notice of Violation concerning a failure to comply with Technical Specification | § 6. 5.2.4.2. | ||
§ 6. 5.2.4.2. Pursuant to the requirements of 10CFR2.201, our response to the Notice of Violation is provided in Attachment | Pursuant to the requirements of 10CFR2.201, our response to the Notice of Violation is provided in Attachment 1. | ||
Sincerely, Attachment | |||
* 8805240261 880519 PDR ADOCK 05000272 Q DCD | |||
-Hope Creek Mr. D. C. Fischer USNRC Licensing Project Manager -Salem R. w. Borchardt USNRC Senior Resident Inspector | |||
-Salem Mr. w. T. Russell, Administrator USNRC Region I Mr. D. M. Scott, Chief Bureau of Nuclear Engineering Department of Environmental Protection 380 Scotch Road | .c Document Control Desk Mr. G. w. Rivenbark 2 | ||
* Trenton, NJ 08628 | USNRC Licensing Project Manager - Hope Creek 05-19-88 Mr. G. w. Meyer USNRC Senior Resident Inspector - Hope Creek j . | ||
§6.5.2.4.2 (for Salem and §6.5.2.4.3 for Hope Creek) requires, in part, that audits of activities required by the Operations Quality Assurance Program meet the Criteria of Appendix "B", 10 CFR 50, be performed least once per 24 months. This requirement is implemented by the licensee in its "Master Audit Plan, QA Audit Group, Nuclear Quality Assurance, Rev. 2 document dated November 23, 1986 which requires an annual audit of Meteorological Program as part of the annual audit of Radiation Protection Services. | Mr. D. C. Fischer USNRC Licensing Project Manager - Salem Mr~ R. w. Borchardt USNRC Senior Resident Inspector - Salem Mr. w. T. Russell, Administrator USNRC Region I Mr. D. M. Scott, Chief Bureau of Nuclear Engineering Department of Environmental Protection 380 Scotch Road | ||
Contrary to these requirements, the Meteorological Program was not audited on an annual basis as required. | * Trenton, NJ 08628 | ||
The Meterological Program has not been audited since 1984. 1. PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COMPANY DOES NOT DISPUTE THE VIOLATION. | * ATTACHMENT 1 10CFR2.201 INFORMATION PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COMPANY SALEM AND HOPE CREEK GENERATING STATIONS RESPONSE TO NOTICE OF VIOLATION INSPECTION REPORT NOS. 50-272/88-09, 50-311/88-09 AND 50-354/88-07 As described in Appendix A of your letter dated April 20, 1988, Technical Specification §6.5.2.4.2 (for Salem and §6.5.2.4.3 for Hope Creek) requires, in part, that audits of activities required by the Operations Quality Assurance Program meet the Criteria of Appendix "B", 10 CFR 50, be performed ~t least once per 24 months. This requirement is implemented by the licensee in its "Master Audit Plan, QA Audit Group, Nuclear Quality Assurance, Rev. 2 document dated November 23, 1986 which requires an annual audit of Meteorological Program as part of the annual audit of Radiation Protection Services. | ||
We acknowledge that a portion of the Meterological Program (J. E. Healy, Co-contractor) has not been audited since 1984, however, remaining functions of the program have been audited as required. | Contrary to these requirements, the Meteorological Program was not audited on an annual basis as required. The Meterological Program has not been audited since 1984. | ||
The Meteorological Program functions and responsibilities are as follows: Radiation Protection Services -Overall coordination of the program. Operations Department | : 1. PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COMPANY DOES NOT DISPUTE THE VIOLATION. | ||
-Compliance with Technical Specification requirements and surveillance associated with the Meterological Program. J. E. Healy Company (Contractor) | We acknowledge that a portion of the Meterological Program (J. E. Healy, Co-contractor) has not been audited since 1984, however, th~ remaining functions of the program have been audited as required. The Meteorological Program functions and responsibilities are as follows: | ||
-Calibration of Met. tower instrumentation, preventive maintenance of tower sensors and verification of control room wind instrumentation accuracy. | Radiation Protection Services - Overall coordination of the program. | ||
Meteorological Evaluation Services (Contractor) | Operations Department - Compliance with Technical Specification requirements and surveillance associated with the Meterological Program. | ||
-Validation of Meteorological data and identification of discrepancies including review and verification of system calibration, maintenance and operations log. | J. E. Healy Company (Contractor) - Calibration of Met. tower instrumentation, preventive maintenance of tower sensors and verification of control room wind instrumentation accuracy. | ||
** *. The Master Audit Plan requires that the Meterological Program be included within the annual audit of Radiation Protection Services organization. | Meteorological Evaluation Services (Contractor) - Validation of Meteorological data and identification of discrepancies including review and verification of system calibration, maintenance and operations log. | ||
The intent of this requirement is to audit those functions of the Meterological Program not included within other audits conducted within the year. The annual audit of the Radiation Protection Services failed to include the Meteorological Program and therefore the functions of J. E. Healy Company (contractor) were not audited as planned. The remaining functions and re8ponsibilities for implementing the Meteorological Program have been audited and effectiveness of program implementation verified, as identified below. Audit No. S-84-42 NM-8 5-014 | |||
Operations/Tech Spec audits including compliance with Met. instrumentation surveillence requirements. | ** | ||
Follow-up audits including verification of actions resultant from Meteorological Program audit including interface responsibilities. | *. | ||
: 2. THE ROOT CAUSE OF THE VIOLATION WAS PERSONNEL ERROR. The audit team leader failed to adequately scope the Radiation Protection Services Audit to include evaluation of the Meteorological Program, as required by the Master Audit Plan. In addi'tion, supervisory review of the developed Audit Plan was inadequate in that it failed to the pmission. | The Master Audit Plan requires that the Meterological Program be included within the annual audit of Radiation Protection Services organization. The intent of this requirement is to audit those functions of the Meterological Program not included within other audits conducted within the year. The annual audit of the Radiation Protection Services failed to include the Meteorological Program and therefore the functions of J. E. Healy Company (contractor) were not audited as planned. The remaining functions and re8ponsibilities for implementing the Meteorological Program have been audited and effectiveness of program implementation verified, as identified below. | ||
: 3. IMMEDIATE ACTIONS Subsequent to identification of the omitted area a audit was conducted of the contractor and effective program implementation was verified. | Audit No. Date Organization/Activity Audited S-84-42 6/84 Met. Evaluation Serv. (contractor)/audit NM-8 5-014 6/8 5 of overall Met. Program and interface NM-8 6-043 6/8 6 responsibilities. | ||
: 4. ACTION TAKEN TO PREVENT RECURRENCE A review of the Audit Program has shown that the identified omission of the Meteorological Program contractor activities was an isolated occurrence. | NM-8 6-34 10/8 6 Operations/Tech Spec audits including NM-88-43 2/88 compliance with Met. instrumentation surveillence requirements. | ||
The omission has been discussed with the individual audit team leader and supervisor and their individual responsibilities were reinforced. | NM-8 5-050 12/8 5 Follow-up audits including verification NM-8 6-012 4/8 6 of actions resultant from Meteorological Program audit including interface responsibilities. | ||
Similar reinforcement of required program implementation has been accomplished with all audit personnel. | : 2. THE ROOT CAUSE OF THE VIOLATION WAS PERSONNEL ERROR. | ||
The audit team leader failed to adequately scope the Radiation Protection Services Audit to include evaluation of the Meteorological Program, as required by the Master Audit Plan. In addi'tion, supervisory review of the developed Audit Plan was inadequate in that it failed to id~ntify the pmission. | |||
: 3. IMMEDIATE CO~CTIVE ACTIONS Subsequent to identification of the omitted area a audit was conducted of the contractor and effective program implementation was verified. | |||
: 4. ACTION TAKEN TO PREVENT RECURRENCE A review of the Audit Program has shown that the identified omission of the Meteorological Program contractor activities was an isolated occurrence. The omission has been discussed with the individual audit team leader and supervisor and their individual responsibilities were reinforced. Similar reinforcement of required program implementation has been accomplished with all audit personnel. | |||
: 5. WE ARE IN FULL COMPLIANCE.}} | : 5. WE ARE IN FULL COMPLIANCE.}} |
Revision as of 11:39, 21 October 2019
ML18093A836 | |
Person / Time | |
---|---|
Site: | Salem, Hope Creek, 05000000 |
Issue date: | 05/19/1988 |
From: | Miltenberger S Public Service Enterprise Group |
To: | NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION & RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (ARM) |
References | |
NLR-N88077, NUDOCS 8805240261 | |
Download: ML18093A836 (4) | |
Text
Public Service Electric and Gas Company Steven E. Miltenberger Public Service Electric and Gas Company P.O. Box 236, Hancocks Bridge, NJ 08038 609 339-4199 Vice President -
Nuclear Operations May 19, 1988 NLR-N88077 United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555 Gentlemen:
REPLY TO NOTICE OF VIOLATION NRC INSPECTION REPORT NOS. 50-272/88-09, 50-311/88-09 AND 50-3 54/88-07 SALEM AND HOPE CREEK GENERATING STATIONS FACILTY OPERATING LICENSE NOS. DPR-70, DPR-75 AND NPF-57 Public Service Electric and Gas Company (PSE&G) is in receipt of your April 20,1988 letter which transmitted a Notice of Violation
- concerning a failure to comply with Technical Specification
§ 6. 5.2.4.2.
Pursuant to the requirements of 10CFR2.201, our response to the Notice of Violation is provided in Attachment 1.
Sincerely, Attachment
.c Document Control Desk Mr. G. w. Rivenbark 2
USNRC Licensing Project Manager - Hope Creek 05-19-88 Mr. G. w. Meyer USNRC Senior Resident Inspector - Hope Creek j .
Mr. D. C. Fischer USNRC Licensing Project Manager - Salem Mr~ R. w. Borchardt USNRC Senior Resident Inspector - Salem Mr. w. T. Russell, Administrator USNRC Region I Mr. D. M. Scott, Chief Bureau of Nuclear Engineering Department of Environmental Protection 380 Scotch Road
- Trenton, NJ 08628
- ATTACHMENT 1 10CFR2.201 INFORMATION PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COMPANY SALEM AND HOPE CREEK GENERATING STATIONS RESPONSE TO NOTICE OF VIOLATION INSPECTION REPORT NOS. 50-272/88-09, 50-311/88-09 AND 50-354/88-07 As described in Appendix A of your letter dated April 20, 1988, Technical Specification §6.5.2.4.2 (for Salem and §6.5.2.4.3 for Hope Creek) requires, in part, that audits of activities required by the Operations Quality Assurance Program meet the Criteria of Appendix "B", 10 CFR 50, be performed ~t least once per 24 months. This requirement is implemented by the licensee in its "Master Audit Plan, QA Audit Group, Nuclear Quality Assurance, Rev. 2 document dated November 23, 1986 which requires an annual audit of Meteorological Program as part of the annual audit of Radiation Protection Services.
Contrary to these requirements, the Meteorological Program was not audited on an annual basis as required. The Meterological Program has not been audited since 1984.
- 1. PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COMPANY DOES NOT DISPUTE THE VIOLATION.
We acknowledge that a portion of the Meterological Program (J. E. Healy, Co-contractor) has not been audited since 1984, however, th~ remaining functions of the program have been audited as required. The Meteorological Program functions and responsibilities are as follows:
Radiation Protection Services - Overall coordination of the program.
Operations Department - Compliance with Technical Specification requirements and surveillance associated with the Meterological Program.
J. E. Healy Company (Contractor) - Calibration of Met. tower instrumentation, preventive maintenance of tower sensors and verification of control room wind instrumentation accuracy.
Meteorological Evaluation Services (Contractor) - Validation of Meteorological data and identification of discrepancies including review and verification of system calibration, maintenance and operations log.
- .
The Master Audit Plan requires that the Meterological Program be included within the annual audit of Radiation Protection Services organization. The intent of this requirement is to audit those functions of the Meterological Program not included within other audits conducted within the year. The annual audit of the Radiation Protection Services failed to include the Meteorological Program and therefore the functions of J. E. Healy Company (contractor) were not audited as planned. The remaining functions and re8ponsibilities for implementing the Meteorological Program have been audited and effectiveness of program implementation verified, as identified below.
Audit No. Date Organization/Activity Audited S-84-42 6/84 Met. Evaluation Serv. (contractor)/audit NM-8 5-014 6/8 5 of overall Met. Program and interface NM-8 6-043 6/8 6 responsibilities.
NM-8 6-34 10/8 6 Operations/Tech Spec audits including NM-88-43 2/88 compliance with Met. instrumentation surveillence requirements.
NM-8 5-050 12/8 5 Follow-up audits including verification NM-8 6-012 4/8 6 of actions resultant from Meteorological Program audit including interface responsibilities.
- 2. THE ROOT CAUSE OF THE VIOLATION WAS PERSONNEL ERROR.
The audit team leader failed to adequately scope the Radiation Protection Services Audit to include evaluation of the Meteorological Program, as required by the Master Audit Plan. In addi'tion, supervisory review of the developed Audit Plan was inadequate in that it failed to id~ntify the pmission.
- 3. IMMEDIATE CO~CTIVE ACTIONS Subsequent to identification of the omitted area a audit was conducted of the contractor and effective program implementation was verified.
- 4. ACTION TAKEN TO PREVENT RECURRENCE A review of the Audit Program has shown that the identified omission of the Meteorological Program contractor activities was an isolated occurrence. The omission has been discussed with the individual audit team leader and supervisor and their individual responsibilities were reinforced. Similar reinforcement of required program implementation has been accomplished with all audit personnel.
- 5. WE ARE IN FULL COMPLIANCE.