IR 05000219/1975003
Text
-
.
.-
- - - -
-
~~-
-
,, a,
.-
p GN O ', ^"
y
,.A f m * *~
.,, aa
..+~j r* ~
,g
.-
_
Dt,h '
UNITED ST ATES
,-
ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION
,
K-E'
f
~
DIMECTOM ATE OP' REGULATORY OPEN ATIONS REGION t
' *!
-. *
l*
631 PARK AVENUE I
KING OF PRUS$1 A, PENNSYLVANI A 19406
)
'{
,
f
,
j
' ru
'
,
FEB 7 1975 y L%if y
.
'
C Jersey Central Power and Light' Company License No. DPR-16
'
Attention: Mr. Ivan R. Pinfrock, Jr.
Insp. No. 50-219/75-03
,
Vice President
"
!
Madison Avenue at Punch Bowl Road
Morristown, New Jersey 07960
Gentlemsa:
I
,
This refers to the inspection conducted by Mr. Everett of this
<
l
,,,,
office on January 20 13, 1975 at the Oyster Creek Nuclear Power n
.
!
Station, Porked River, New Jersey of activities authorised by
i ABC License No. DPR-16 and to the discussions of our findings held by Mr. Everett with Messrs. Carroll and Pelrina of your staff at
'
the comelusion of the inspection.
x
.
Areas examined during this inspection are described in the Office l
of Inspection and Enforcement Inspection Report which is enclosed
with this letter. Within these areas, the inspection consisted of
selective examinations of procedures and representative records, i
interviews with personnel, measurements made by the inspector, and AMi L absorvations by the inspector.
'
,
Within the scope of this inspection, no items of noncogliance
,
were observed.
'
In accordance with Section 2.790 of the AEC's " Rules of Practice",
-
Part 2, Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, a copy of this letter and the enclosed inspection report will be placed in the
NRC's Public Document Room. If this report contains any information
,
that you (or your contreetor) believe to be propristary, it is
,
necessary that you make a written application within 20 days to this office to withhold such information from public disclosure.
Any such application must include a full statement of the
,
reasons on the basis of which it is claimed that the information is proprietary, and should be prepared so that proprietary j
.
information identified in the application is contained in a
!
separate part of the document.
If we do not hear from you in this regard within the specified period, the report will be
'
i placed in the Public Document Room.
h 9604230245 960213 R
DEKOK95-258 PDR v,
.
t'
.,g f
C, s,,,,,,,,,,,,
- e-:.
..,,
,
..y.
...
,,,,
iblW(R Everett/1c S,ohr (
Ne son j
_
, _,,,,,.
,,,,,,,,,,,
..1hd...,._,,,.. D..WE.c
..
_M
.s
.
.
j t
ABC-HS Ww.9% ABCM ONO om,
'
i ( o M *G 9 L V (
{
.
'
,
.
..
o
.-
r'
-
.
-
.
.
-2-
,
.i y
<
J No reply to this letter is required; however, should you have any questions concerning this inspection, we will be pleased to discuss them with you.
Sincerely, Paul R. Nelson, Chief Radiological & Environmental Protection Branch
Enclosure:
IE Inspection Report No. 50-219/75-03
REGION 1
h
<
-'
E'
631 PARK AVENUE
'
E K!NG OF PRUSSI A, PENNSYLVANI A 19406
-
o
- . Thornburg, Chief, Field Support and Enforcement
.
Office of Inspection and Enforcement HQ
-
OTSTER > CREEK EXPOSURES,1973 (TRACK ITDI #HOO370F1)
'
.
The contents of this sieno are in referance to the 1/15/75 telecon between DL and P. Knapp concerning a letter from P.R. Shoop (IBEW) to dated 1/8/75.
The following categorization of personnel exposure data for Oyster Creek.
,
during 1973 was obtained via telecon discussions with the plant'a Health Physics Supervisor on January 15, and 21, 1974:
_ Category Percent of Total Exposure,(1449 man-rems)
1.
Radwaste a.
Contractor 5%
b.
Station Personnel 6%
2.
ftechanical Maintenance 10%
3.
Reactor Operations 7%
4.
Instrument Maintenance 3%
aliMe 5.
Electrical Maintenance 3%
6.
Radiation Protection Operations 3%
7.
Chemical Operations 0.5%
8.
Station llelpers 4%
)
9.
Shutdown operations Including 9 week 57%
Refueling Outage
l i
l
,
.
f/
..
_
....., _
_,,,,,
[
orrica > _. CRESS.
'
.....
f[.......k.{?.
...._.....
sooname >.. yson/......
11.....[
. 3gN,(
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
t.
oau >
.A 28. ?.5,,,
,
,
Perm ABC.Ste (Rev.9 53) ABCM OHO I
^ b N'h 9 N s 1/ OO
^
cuv vauv3i(
y
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _.
_
_._
_. __
_
_
__
_
___
.
._._.. _
_ _. _ _
.
,
.
m
,
-
-2-
,
l l
Based on previous inspections and the recent telecon discussions with Oyster i
Creek personnel, the following items all appeared to contribute to Oyster Creek's exposures being greater than three of other facilities during 1973.
I a.
Oyster Creek was one of the first civilian power reactors to be built sad at the end of 1973 had completed four years of operation. h
-
personnel exposures for all plants appear to increase or a function of plant age especially during the first few years which was the case i
.
at Oyster Creek from 1970 through 1973. h oe personnel exposure
increases are attributed to increased radiation levels throughout the plant where personnel are engaged in work functions. h high levels of radiation are related directly to an increased inventory of
'
fission products (from failed fuel) and activation corrosion products in the primary coolant which, in turn, is a function of the length of plant operating time, h high radiation levels, so produced, are found at reactor systems surfaces, process flow lines, radwaste processing components, etc.
_
b.
h management control program in the area of radiation protection l
was found to be inadequate during an early 1973* inspection as evidenced by the numerous violations identified.
t I
c.
h principle of "ALAP" during 1973 was not being incorporated into i
the Oyster Creek radiation protection program nor was there a clear management policy reflecting ALAP. At the present time, however, the ALAP principle is incorporated into both the management policy g
and the radiation protection program.
d.
h Health Physics supervision during 1973 was less effective in minimizing exposures than is the present supervision which has been upgraded by the introduction of new personnel who are more committed to the ALAP philosophy.
With regard to the question of what the union can do to improve upon Oyster Creek radiation protection program, the following three suggestions are made:
h union could stress to its workers their responsibility under a.
10 CFR 19 which, in part etates the workers should report to the
]
licensee any conditions which might contribute to any unnecessary
'
exposures, i.e. the worker should aid the licensee in the area i
of minimising exposures. Oyster Creek Health Physica supervision
indicated that workers very rarely offer advice on how to further i
minimize exposures, despite the fact that the workers are the ones who are most familiar with the jobs from which radiation
'
exposures result.
}
- RO:I Inspection Report 50-219/73-02 e
--
-
-
-.
-
.
.
-
.
-
.
-3-b.
The union could set involved in efforts to effect design criteria to assure ALAP. This might be achieved through intervening, petitioning Licensing or joining the committees of standard setting groups.
/;.,
. p.,
The union might stress to the workers that by maintaining their c.
accumulated doses ALAP that they will always be assure of availability for overtime and its accompanying financial benefits.
The essence of this memo was related to Dick Lessler (RAB) via telephone on 1/22/75 in accord with Track Item request.
-
.
..
,
Paul R. Nelson, Chief Radiological and Environmental Protection Branch cc Ford Dreher g
...
,
.
l
!'
i
,
.
i
!
e
)
I
,
,
v
.
-
-
-..
-.. -.--
.-.- - -
.~----
.
.-
-.-
L 4.C.
- InternationalBrotherhood r
N*s H. Pdlard Joseph 0.Keenan fN
.
M]
W
- '
- ** ~ E dEljetricalWorkg
,'
- 4.
-
.
,
,
,
..,
,-,..-
-
s,
.
.
i
- -
,
,
. '..
.; -
- -
-
u
-
y
.
!
...
'
' ',
'
',, /.'
},
'
<:.
-
-
-
-
...
.
.
,
,,
,,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
..
,
..
..
..
l~ hj$
lites iseist.N.W.
-
T}.
"
'
'
'*
'
-
,
.....
.
.
.
.; ;
fun. o.c.
'
"
~
.%-
,.
.
,,
,
.
,
.
.-
. '.
-
.
.
..
.
.,
.
.
-
.
. -
,
.
.
.
.
E,c
':
..
.
.
'
'
.- [
January 8, 1975
^
'
.
,7
.
.
,.
.
.
,
.s.;
-
.
-
-
-
.
,
.
,
,
,
,
,
,
.
-
,
..
.
.,.
U. 5. Atomic Energy Commission
-
.
'
.
-
l
Angelo Giambusso, Deputy Director
.
,
'
-
,
,
-
_
for Reactor Projects
.f
,,
- -
,
-
-
-
-
,
.
j
.
"Directora te of Licensing
-
.
-
-
.
,,,.
,
Washington, D. C. 20545
'
,
,
'
'
'
.-
Dear Mr. Giambusso:
'
-
~
'
.
.
i
-
-
'
.
s
.
The IBEW represents the bargaining unit personnel at the Oyster
,
.
Creek Nuclear Generating Station.
~
.
.
.
.-
.
.-
.
,
.
In reviewing the FES for Oyster Creek, an item of interest was
found in 5.4.3.3.- Occupational Radiation Exposure. A valve of 450 i
man-rem per year was given for the unit.
-
.
i.
-
.
The AIF in September of 1974 issued " Compilation and Analysis
-
.
. of Date on Occupational Radiation Exposure Experienced at Operating
)
t
,
Nuclear. Power Plants." This report lists the exposure for the various
-
.
y
- ,
-
iiperating stations.
While not identifying the Oyster Creek data by i
mame it is possible to identify the station. For the year 1973 on
.
l-site personnel received 551 man-rems with off site personnel receiving
898 man-rems. The. year 1972 was only slightly below the 450 mandrem
'
l valve given in the FES. The 1974 figures are not available.
.
.
..
The AEC Sth (1972) and 6th (1973) Ionizing. Radiation Exposure
..
Record and Report while not giving the total man-rems does not list
'
'
.the number of individuals in each exposure bracket. Oyster Creek data
-
,
i indicates a greater number of exposed personnel in the higher brackets.
'
,.
,
,
'
Our concern is obvious since most of this exposure is to bargain-
-
.
ing unit personnel who are our members.
We realize that the 450 man-rem per year for on site personnel is
'
a guideline. The fact that it has been exceeded is not greatly disturb-
'
ing. The comparison of the Oyster Creek exposures with the rest of the i
industry is the disturbing factor.
.
.
.
i
.
What.can the IDEW do to help reduce this exposure history at Oyster
Creek?
-
.
.
.
,
'
,
Sincerely,
'
,
,
,
.
Paul R. Shoop
~
International Representative
.
,
_
si. : i... n.... a n
.
p
.-%w, g
,..
~g- - +
-
-.x-
-. -.
'
i
"
ACTION ITEM CONTROL FORM (DRAFT)
TRACK
P A/l A/l DESCRIPTION FACILITY INT. DATE
-
.
,
.
s
.
,
.
,
io ii 52 li, i. ism.
.,
.
i.h.
2.
,, u n
,.
,s
,.
,,
2.
,,
3o
u n
3, 3.
,,
3..,.
...,
.,
.,
..
.. so si s2 s3 s.
,, s. sr s. s..o
.i u
.3 -
NC O 3 'l oF I Oc lfRb cs u hE FA TE O C P
- l C I
- l 5
4 ;L$ t
~
-
'
EXP. DATE
'A '
DATE REC'D PERS ASSG MS ACTION ACT. COMP
'C'
>
32l si ss se sr 6e 'so ro si ra: r3 r. rs 7. n is-r, eo ei-s2 si s. es se er se ss so st iodos s.
,s os or se
,s 'ioo.oiio2ioaio.
ioriosiosi nctiiii2ita r i iis i te ii > r i. 'is i2o sai' za iaii2.i:s '26 j $?'
!&&&
(; ( '_
. jp g m y lOf j 2 -] [
."/.1l
' C /
-
J c
'
0]s 0 G
- J SY
-
' (A YREFERENCE S N $ SSDAPP YW O S Q$
N O
"
'
'
,
>7 h &1%Q
$0
~
'
A. 6, am ban o Ahd /- 6'-&
.
<
~
CLOSE OUT METHOD
"N
'
'
-
L K# %G cz-s& # -
/
'
'
.-9
.
CODES.
TRACK #
= THE NUMBER ASSIGNED TO THIS A/l
,
P
= PRIORITY
.13
-
A/l
= TYPE OF ACTION ITEM FACILITY
= NAME OF FACILITY INVOLVED g
,.
INT. DATE = TODAY'S DATE f'
EXP. DATE = DATE OF EXPECTED COMPLETION
'
'A'
= ACKNOWLEDGEMENT PERSON ASSIGNED s
DATE REC D = DATE DOCUMENTS ACTUALLY RECEIVED ACTION REQUESTED h-
-
C - hh PERS. ASSG.=
PERSON ASSIGNED TO THIS g/22 JLsr
,
f_
M MS
=NU BER F MILESTONE BEING WORKED ON h
M dA4-4 --
/ COMP = ACT CO PL ON DA
>
itL, EA J/A wash
.
c
- "'wc" o
A& <? m ?WRt on zeed-
=
"'
' Uh & L L & u w n h ilz,?
~
b..
' D L, L L J fL A M L L 6:
_
ma 2&,A Akzd',
y gg,
-
u..s
-
,
.
-
.
-.--
-
-
.
-.
.
.
-
-