IR 05000219/1980005
| ML19323A608 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oyster Creek |
| Issue date: | 02/26/1980 |
| From: | Briggs T, Keimig R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19323A601 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-219-80-05, 50-219-80-5, NUDOCS 8004210450 | |
| Download: ML19323A608 (6) | |
Text
.
.
O U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMISSION l
OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
REGION I
Report No.
50-219/80-05 Docket No.
50-219 i
?
License No.
DPR-16 Priority Category C
i
--
Licensee:
Jersey Central Power and Light Company Madison Avenue at Punch Bowl Road Morristown, New Jersey 07960 l
Facility Name:
Oyster Creek, Unit 1 Inspection At:
Forked River, New Jersey
Inspection Conducted:
January 29 - February 1, 1980 Inspectors:
/f 2 -24- /d Briggs, Teactor p
or date date
-
date Approved by:
2 -24 -[a R.
Keimig, Chief ctor Projects date ection No. 1, R Branch
!
Inspection Summary:
Inspection on January 29 - February 1, 1980 (Report No. 50-219/80-05)
Areas Inspected:
Routine, onsite, unannounced inspection by one regional-based inspector (42.5 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br />) of 5 inspection areas:
refueling activities; independent inspection effort; IE Bulletin followup; in-office licensee event report review; and, in-office periodic report review. Plant tours were also conducted.
Noncompliances:
None identified.
l l
!
Region I Form 12 (Rev. April 1977)
8004210450
-
-
t
.
.
F F
r DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted i
J. Carroll, Station Superintendent
J. Chardos, Senior Engineer, Generation Engineering
,
K. Fickeissen, Plant Support Superintendent
-
V. Foglia, Engineer, Generation Engineering
W. Garvey, Director, Station Administration l
M. Goldie, QA Specialist, Procurement
'
J. Knubel, Supervisor, Nuclear Safety and Licensing l
J. Maloney, Supervisor, Station Operations J. Pelrine, Chemical Supervisor R. Pinelli, Project Engineer, Generation Engineering J. Riggar, Security Supervisor
- J. Sullivan, Unit Superintendent
,
Other members of the technical, engineering and operating staffs were also contacted.
- Present at exit interview.
2.
Refueling Activities
-
New fuel receipt inspection records for 122 fuel assemblies were reviewed by the inspector to verify that receipt inspection was performed in
,
accordance with Procedure No. 205.1, Receiving and Processing New Fuel.
All records were complete with discrepancies noted and resolutions identified.
i In-core fuel sipping was being conducted during this inspection.
These activities were observed by the inspector on both regular and backshifts.
,
All activities were being conducted in compliance with Technical Specifi-cation and procedural requirements.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
3.
Independent Inspection Effort a.
Scope During the course of the inspection, various operations were observed and facility tours were conducted to observe refueling outage activities.
Activities observed, discussed and reviewed were as follows:
High Radiation Level at Island Beach State Park.
NRC:RI received
--
notification from the New Jersey Bureau of Radiation Protection at approximately 8:00 p.m., on January 28, 1980, that the Ocean County Radiological Officer had observed radiation readings of
_
__
_ _ _ - _.
__-
___ _ ____
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
_ _ - ____
.
between 2 and 4.7 millirem per hour at their monitoring station at Island Beach State Park (7 miles east of Oyster Creek).
The high readings were obtained during the hours of midnight, January 27, 1980 through 1:00 p.m., January 28, 1980.
The State of New Jersey was notified at approximately 5:00 p.m.,
.
January 28, 1980. The inspector reviewed stack filter analysis results to determine if any release had been made from the site. The results, covering a four (4) day period (January 25-29,1980), were as follows:
Iodine-131, 1.33 X 10 microcuries
--
Barium-140, 9.33 X 10 microcuries
--
Lanthanum-140, 1.16 X 10 microcuries
--
The inspector noted that the above readings appeared higher than normal based on the plant being shutdown since January 5, 1980, however, these levels would not cause the high readings as reported to the State of New Jersey.
Further investigation revealed that the facility ventilation had been altered such that stack flow was reduced to approximately the normal rate.
]
Total releases are based on activity for a given volume and i
with the volume decreased, higher total release volumes (conser-i
vative) were obtained. Actual activity released was approximately i
\\ of the above values.
The State of New Jersey Bureau of Radiation Protection took
backup readings at the Island Beach State Park on January 29, 1980. The readings obtained were normal background of.01 to
.04 tillirem per hour.
Three radiological monitoring station TLDs from the Oyster Creek area were also collected by the State Bureau of Radiation Protection which covered the previous
45 day period. All readings were normal. No reason for the
!
abnormal radiation readings on January 27 and 28 could be I
determined by the State of New Jersey, the licensee, or the
'
inspector.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
,
i
!
The inspector attended the licensee's core spray sparger repair
--
i meeting on January 31, 1980.
During the meeting, the licensee
'
discussed the various repair options available and the various
analyses that would be required to justify the selected means
of repair.
No final decision was made during the meeting.
The
,
licensee intends to present all information at a meeting with the NRC in Washington, D. C. on February 15, 1980.
l
No items of noncompliance were identified.
.
_.
_ _ _ _
~
_ _ _ _ _
_
_
__
i
-
The inspector verified that Isolation Condenser seismic restraints
--
on the steam supply to the Isolation Condenser had been reviewed and tested under IE Bulletin 79-02 and 79-14.
This review was requested via memorandum from E. Jordan, Assistant Director for j
Technical Programs, ROI, to E. Brunner, Chief, Reactor Operations
and Nuclear Support Branch, Region I, because of water hammer experienced at another facility.
The inspector ensured that the subject restraints had been inspected in accordance with the applicable requirements of IE Bulletin 79-02 and 79-14. The adequacy of design is undergoing further review by the Systematic Evaluation Program Branch, Division of Operating Reactors.
In
'
addition, the licensee has not, during this ten (10) year
,
operating history, experienced water hammer in the steam supply
!
line of the Isolation Condensers.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
)
The inspector, accompanied by a licensee representative, conducted a tour of accessible plant areas to observe the status and condition of plant l
systems and activities in progress.
Particular emphasis was directed at plant housekeeping.
Areas inspected included the Control Room, Turbine i
Building, Off Gas Building, Mechanical and I&C Maintenance Shops, Reactor Building, Main Coodenser Bay, Torus, and accessible portions of the
!
Drywell.
The following were observed and discussed:
Radiation controls;
--
Housekeeping, including attention to the elimination of fire hazards; i
--
No fluid leaks of significance;
--
The condition of hangers and seismic restraints;
--
Equipment tagging;
--
Control Room manning; and,
--
Lighted annunciators in the Control Room.
--
The inspector noted that visible improvement had been made in the area of l
plant cleanliness.
The licensee stated that a massive cleanup campaign had been initiated in an attempt to keep up with shutdown maintenance activities.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
i
.
_
.
.
.
4.
IE Bulletin Followup IE Bulletin 79-02, Pipe Base Plate Designs Using Concrete Expansion l
--
Anchor Bolts.
The inspector witnessed testing of anchor bolts to verify that testing was performed in accordance with approved proce-
!
dures and that the procedure contained sufficient information to
'
enable workers to perform testing that would comply with the require-ments of IE Bulletin 79-02.
All testing observed was conducted per procedure.
-
This item remains open pending final licensee submittal and NRC review.
'
,
,
No items of noncompliance were observed.
'
5.
In-Office Review
!
a.
Licensee Event Reports The inspector reviewed LERs received in the llRC:RI office to verify that details of the event were clearly reported including the accuracy of the description of cause and adequacy of corrective action, to
,
determine whether further information was required from the licensee, whether generic implications were involved, and whether the event
,
!
warranted on site followup.
The following LERs were reviewed:
LER Event i
79-37/3L Failure of Core Spray Booster Pumps to start due to a loose
'
fuse i
79-38/3L Failure of Diesel Generator No. 1 to start due to breaker
'
position switch adjustment
!
79-39/3L One of four APRM Rod Block setpoints found set 1% above i
T. S. limit 79-42/3L One Electrontic Relief Valve Lifting during plant operation 79-44/3L One reactor building to torus vacuum breaker failing to open fully due te contractor scaffolding No items of noncompliance were identified.
j
l
. -
-
.
b.
Review of Special Reports
In-office review of the following reports has been completed with no j
unacceptable conditions identified:
November 1979, Monthly Operating Data; and,
--
December 1979, Monthly Operating Data
--
.
'
6.
Exit Interview The inspec6v..et with licensee representatives (denoted in paragraph 1)
at the conclusion of the inspection on February 1,1980.
The inspector
summarized the findings, purpose, and scope of the inspection.
The licensee l
acknowledged the inspector's findings.
.
P
l
f f
I I
-
,
!
!
[
,
i t
l
,
l l
l l
.
h
,
,-