IR 05000363/1971001
Text
-
..
..,
-
.
.
.
,
,r
.o o,
-
-
o
-
-
.
.
_
U. S. ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSIOM
'
.,
,
,. -
j
REGION I
DIVISION OF COMPLIANCE Report of Inspection CO Report No. 363/71-1 Licensee:
Jersey Central Power and Light Company (Forked River No. 1)
A CPPR Not Issued Category A
,
Date of Inspection:
January 4, 1971 Date of Previous Inspection:
November 2-3, 1970 Inspected by:
o 'N '
R. F. Heishman, Reactor Inspector (Principal)
Date Reviewed by M&
f-8'7/
. M. Howard, Senior Reactor Inspector Date Proprietary Information:
None
.
SCOPE A management exit interview was conducted on January 4, 1971, at the corporate offices of General Public Utilities, 260 Cherry Hill Road, Parsippany, New
._
Jersey. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss the findings of the initial quality assurance inspection * with the Forked River project management and its major contractors.
'
SUMMARY Only those criteria which did not appear to meet the intent of Appendix B, 10 CFR 50 were discussed. These included Criteria III, IV, and XVIII. The li-censee was receptive and stated corrective action would be taken on each item discussed. The following significant items were discussed.
Crf rerion III - Design Control i
The inspector stated the GPU involvement in design review and/or design checks had not been defined or delineated in writing and that no procedures had been developed for accomplishment of this task.
Mr. Heward stated GPU engineering would review specifications and drawings and this was not considered design review but desig'n checks. The inspector stated the QA plan should specify and define the GPU intended actions in this area and Compliance would review for conformance to the intent of the criterion and verify implementation during a subseque t inspection.
.
"'
DEKOK95-258 PDR
..
_..
_ _ ~ _,, _
_
__
...
_. _ _..... -.. -. -
_. _
, _... _. _..-
^
+d wee
"
e.
w. _
,
y,
,m, l'.; o
.
..y.
e,
,
t e-f*
t
+r
)
'
i.
'
v
. -s
.
.
2-
' *
1,.
L
.
E
. Criterion IV - Procurement Document Control i
!
The' inspector stated that~the QA program for procurement documents did not
~
'
meet the intent of.the criterion in that the scope of document review was not
-
i
.specified. - In, addition, the GPU. procedures applicable to.this' area'were not l
completed or approved.
I{l
i
B Mr. Avers' stated these procedures were approved and available for inspection.
cThe inspector stated the procedures would be reviewed during~ subsequent inspec-
';
,
i'
tions.
'
Criterion XVIII - Audits
'
l'
The inspector stated audit ' schedules specifying frequency, areas.of coverage, l
and procedures or check lists to be used were not available during the inspec-
tion.
Mr. Avers stated a schedule has been prepared and procedures written and approved
"
which were now available.
The inspector: stated these would be inspected during
.
l
subsequent inspections.
!
,
!
's ATTENDANCE i
,
i The following persons were present for the meeting:
'
JCP&L/GPU-
,
'
.,
'
Mr. R. H.'Sims, Vice President, JCP&L Mr. W. A. Verrochi, Project Executive
!
..
l Mr. W. H. Hirst, Manager of Projects l
Mr. S. B. Palmeter, Manager of Construction
!
Mr. R. W. Heward, Project Manager, Forked' River 1 i
-
f Mr. B. G. Avers,. Manager of Quality Assurance
Mr. S. Bartnoff, Manager of Engineering
Mr. E. S. Fisher, QA Engineer-l Mr. N. Goodenough, QA Engineer
'
Mr. J. R. Thorpe, Manager of Safety and Licensing
!
L Mr. N. M. Cole, Engineer Combustion Engineering
.
e Mr. J. C. Moulton, Project Manager, Forked River 1 Mr. T. R.'Colandrea, Manager, Quality Systems
.
'
,
a
-
,
!
""
-.
--
_,.
?
e
k
,,, -
,,,, -
-
_
. -, - -
~ _
-
-
.-
.
..
...
.._._
.. _
-
L...
-
_.:._.
'
., -.. -
.....
,
- . o / _ ',
......,.... r,
-
..
,
,
+-
'
w _
,
3-
-
,:.,
/
e.
' Burns and' Roe
.
Mr. R. P. Giloth, Project Manager, Forked River 1.
Mr. F. C. Meckle, Quality Assurance Leader
.
-- r, -
. Stearns-Roger V.
- m C
Mr.-T. S. Frost, QA Manager
- Mr. M. A. Kurlander, QA Site Supervisor
,
f ',
t
6
.g
..
e
e
- +.
E
/
g
.
s
.,
ww
-.
.
.
.
._
_ _ _.
_
.
.
___.___
_ _ _ -.. _ _ _ _ _.. _ _ _.. _ _ _
'
.
.
,
+
'
,
',t
.
.
e i
..
.
'
!
'3944 -
,
.
,
,
I.
-
,
February 23, 1971
YN'$
$"
James F. O'Reilly, Chief, Raastor Testing & Operations Braneh j
Division of Compliance, RQ l'
j INQUIRY M MORANDUM NO. 219/71.A JERSEY GDrfRAL FOWER & LIGNT 00MPANY (OfSTER CREEK 1)
'
ALLEGATION OF RADIO &ctIVE GA85008 REIRASE IN EKMSS Of LICNNE LIMITS
I.
I The assigned inspector was contacted by Dr. V. Sailor of the Physiss
]
Department at Brookhaven on February 22, 1971, and informed that a-Q4 Mr. L. Rosart has made a public allegation that the Oyster Creek faeility
[&
had released 3296 ouries of gaseous 1 131 during a.24-hour period. The l
release was alleged to have occurred between the period of July, 1969
,
i and June, 1970. Mr. Bogart is reported to have made this release in a i
bi-weekly nous letter entitled " Watch on the AEC", Issus No. 21, dated i
February 8, 1971 (copy being sought by 00:1). The organisation i
publishing this news letter is the National Committee to Stop Environmental
'
Follution with a listed address of 214 Third Street, N.E., Washington, D.C.
.
The specific quote reported to be contained in this nous letter is as
!
follows:
.
M
"Between July, 1969, and June, 1970, at a time e sa the 540 magamatt BWR at Oyster Creek was still being shaken down and not operating at
'
the 85% espacity forecast for normal use, gaseous radioactivo dis-j charges ran 50,486 curies. Even more distressing is the record which shows for one 24-hour period, 3296 curies of I-131 were sent out the j
,
eta.u.-
our review of recently issued corrected copias of JC's sosti-annual reports U'(
for this period show that these apparently were the sources of Mr. Bagtht's y$
numbers; however, the reported figure for 1 131 (24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />) is 3296 uC1.
~ ' ^
!
i Dr. sailor informed the inspector that a public seminar is planand for
,
l February 26 and 27, 1971, in the town of Mount Harmon, Massachusetts in
!
the Mount Harmon Nigh School. The seminar is said to be sponsored by an
environmental group which is active in the southern Vermont, northern i
Massachusetts area. We were informed that the pro 8 ram arranger is a l
Mr. Levitt who can be reached at 413-498-5311, ext. 78. Dr. Sailor stated i
that Brookhaven will be represented by Professor Robert Romer of the
Department of Physics at Amherst Co11ess ;Amherst, Massachusetts and by i
Professor Wilson of the Harvard Physics staff. We vers also informed that j
the AEC will be represented at the seminar, possibly by a commissioner.,
!
Dr. Sailor thought that the purpose of the sponsoring group for the
[
__
--
>
. _ so y:- = sa m ---- 1 --- -- p-
.sans noenas.
j'
N
!
J omer >
COMPLIANCE...
.
.....,
.
[
JMNTIG"CL z
CARLSON
$
i sunnAuc > fiC..DittaaM L
M
'
2/23/71
,
DATE >
. _...........
.
.............. _
_...
'
Form AEC-Ste (Rev. 9 53) AECM 0240
- v. a. sovannusut paintme orrece i.ee o.sao.so?
~
l.
n e l mi t L /2 f u s,,syy v W&
-hf '
.
..
. -..
..
.
-
-
. -.
. - -
-
-
.
. _
_ _ _ - - -. - -
.-. - -..
.
. -..
'
< s
~~
m&:.Y_,a
,
p
....
y vg
.
,
,/
2.,
i
-
.
The assigned inspector recontacted Dr. Sailor and Professor Esame on pobruary 23, 1971 and informed them of the results of our review of the licenses's reports of gaseous releases from the facility.
'
l,,*.2
.
We will keep you informed of'emy further signifienst informatism sogarding a<.>-
this matter,
'
s
!
R. T. Carlson f
Senio/Saastor Inspector i
cc:
E. C. Case, DRS (3)
P. A. Morris DEL
,
'
R. S. Boyd, DRL (2)
l'
R. C. DsYoung. DEL (2)
.;.
D. J. Skovbolt, DEL (3)
P. W. Howe, DRL (2)
i A. Cisabusso, CO j
L. Kornblith, C0
R. Engsiken, C0 assional Directors, CO i
REG Files i
!
a S,e s a dh *'m gE ?.o p
T
- @ dee%,
$%
- )jy Nyy ;,,,= g f g..
'N-
'
,
3 g + 374
'
. tar
')%g 'M
,
br
'
,,
.,\\,
,,..
^ ' ' '
e
,
j
,
gs
, ;
i
!
!
J
!
!
i k
i
,
s t
,
!
!
- -
s i
,.
,
!
,
.
_.
.
_
>