ML19291B670
| ML19291B670 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 04/29/1977 |
| From: | Arnold R METROPOLITAN EDISON CO. |
| To: | Brunner E NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19291B668 | List: |
| References | |
| GQL-0570, GQL-570, NUDOCS 7911110069 | |
| Download: ML19291B670 (3) | |
Text
-*?H272
=
- -m
^/y r: METROPOLITAN EDISON COMPAN SUBSIDIA RY OF GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITIES CORPORA TICN POST OFFICE BOX 542 READING, PENNSYLVANIA 19603 TELEPHONE 215 - 929-3601 April 29,1977 GQL 0570 Mr. Eldon J. Brunner, Chief Reactor Operations and Nuclear Support Branch U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Com::tission 631 Park Avenue King of Prussia, Pennsylvania 19406
Dear Mr. Brunner:
Docket'No. 50-289 3
Operation License No. DPR-50 Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit 1 ('fMI-1)
Inspection Report No. 77-0h This letter and the enclosure are in response to your inspection letter of April 6, 1977, concerning Dr. R. Bores inspection of TMI-1 and the resultant finding of three (3) apparent deficiencies.
Sincerely,
/
y
/
/
v R. C.
old Vice President
'RCA:DGM:rk
Enclosures:
Responses to Apparent Violttions A, B, & C
\\coz GB n
7(91111 o 06 f
O Metropolitan Edison Company Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit 1 Docket No. 50-289 License No. DFR-50 Inspection No. TT-Oh RESPONSE TO APPARENT VIOLATIONS Antarent Violation A Section 4.h.a and Table 3 of the Environmental Technical Specifications (ETS) require, in part, that air particulates be sa= pled and analyzed on a weekly basis at each of the specified locations.
Contrary to these requirements, air particulates were not sampled and analyzed for one of these specified locations, 901, during 10 successive weeks from March 85 to June 3, 1976.
Restonse to Annarent Violation The subject sampler, which was cut of commission during the initial refueling outage, experienced mechanical and electrical malfunctions
']
requiring extensive repair time.
The sampler was repaired, and we are now in full compliance. Also, it should be noted that all of the other indicator and background stations were operable during this period.
There is now on hand at TMI a complete, uninstalled, sa=pler which can replace a broken sampler with a minimum of down tae.
Antarent Violation B & C B.
Section h.h.a and Table 3 of the ETS require, in part, that sediment samples be analyzed with sufficient analytical se:nsitivity so as to meet the minimum sensitivity requirements specified in Table 3 Contrary to these require =ents, the required sediment samples collected in July 1976 were not analyzed with sufficient sensitivity to meet the specified minimum sensitivities for Sr-89 and for Sr-90.
C.
Section h.h.a and Table 3 of the ETS require, in part, that water sa=ples collected at the City of Columbia water intake be analyzed with sufficient sensitivity to meet the minimum analytical sensitivities specified in Table 3 Centrary to these requirements, the water samples collected from the City of Colu=bia water intake during the Thi.zd Quarter, 1976,, were not analyzed with sufficient sensitivity to meet the specified minimum sensitivity for Sr-89 1582 339
~
Os ag RESPONSE 'IO APPARENT VIOLATIONS (continued)
Resuonse to Anuarent Violation B & C It is the contention of the licensee that the current minimum sensitivity of analysis requirements of th ETS., with regard to Sr-89andSr-90,areoverlyrestrictive.17 The licensee vill prepare a Technical Specification change request to adopt the sensitivity requirements of Reg. Guide k.8, for Sr-89 and Sr-90 analyses.
During the process of formulating a T.S.C.R. the licensee vill attempt to meet the current requirement.
It is the intent of the licensee to achieve full compliance by June 1, 1977 1/
At the present time longer counting times have been used along with larger saaples to meet the requirements.
Please note that every analysis conducted for Sr-89 and Sr-90 during 1976 met or exceeded the minimum sensitivity requirements of Reg. Guide 4.8
]
(Dec. 1975).
1532 340
_