ML19331E198
| ML19331E198 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oyster Creek |
| Issue date: | 05/19/1980 |
| From: | Grier B NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | Finfrock I JERSEY CENTRAL POWER & LIGHT CO. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19331E197 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8009090168 | |
| Download: ML19331E198 (2) | |
See also: IR 05000219/1980003
Text
- .
-
-
-
. -
_ .
..
%g
,.
-
UNITED STATES
i
8
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
'
o
3
I
REGION I
"
$31 PARK AVENUE
KING OF PRUSSIA, PENNSYLVANIA 19406
. *****
- Orckst No. 50-219
g g i g ggg
j
Jersey Central Power'and Light Company
ATTN:
Mr. Ivan R. Finfrock, Jr.
Vice President
Madison Avenue at Punch Bowl Road
i
Morristown, New Jersey 07960
i
Gentlemen:
Subject:
Inspection No. 50-219/80-03
1
This refers to the inspection conducted by Mr. R. L. Nimitz and Mr. G. P.
Yuhas of this office on January 21-25, 1980, at the Oyster Creek Nuclear
Generating Station of activities authorized by NRC License No. DPR-16 and to
the discussions of our findings held by Mr. Nimitz with Mr. J. L. Sullivan at
the conclusion of the inspection, and to subsequent telephone discussions
between Mr. D. Turner of your staff and Mr. Yuhas on January 31, 1980 and
Mr. J. Devlin of this office and Mr. Carroll on March 10, 1980 and telephone
discussions between Mr. Nimitz and Mr. Turner on April 2,1980.
Areas examined during this inspection are described in the Office 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, interviews with personnel, measurements made by
the inspector, and observations by the inspector.
I
Based on the results.of this inspection, it appears that certain of your
activities were not conducted in full compliance with NRC requirements as set
forth in the Notice of Violation, enclosed herewith as Appendix A.
These
items of noncompliance have been categorized into the levels as described in
our correspondence to you dated December 31, 1974.
This notice is sent to you
pursuant to the provisions of Section 2.201 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice,"
Part 2, Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations.
Section 2.201 requires you to
submit to this office, within twenty (20) days of your receipt of this notice,
!
I
a written statement or explanation in reply including:
(1) corrective steps
~
which have been,taken.by you and the results achieved; (2) corrective steps
l
which will be taken to avoid further items of noncompliance; and (3) the date
when full compliance will be achieved.
In addition to the need for corrective
l
action regarding these specific items of noncompliance, we are concerned about
the implementation of your management control systems that permitted them to
'
occur.- Consequently, in your reply, you should describe in particular, those
actions taken or planned to improve the effectiveness of your management
'.
control systems.
'
Item number.B, C, and D, shown in the Notice of Violation enclosed with this
letter are recurrent items.
In your response to this letter please give this
matter-your particular attention.
,
8'009090 h
-
.-
.-
. .
. .
-.
-
.--
- --
'
.
J:rs:y C' ntral Power cnd Light
e
Company
2
ggg
In addition, we are concerned with the implementation of your facility ALARA
program.
Although your response to Inspection 79-18 addresses ALARA requirements
associated with work procedures, the description does not include methods of
assuring ALARA concepts are applied to day to day activities and activities
not necessarily associated with written procedures.
In your response, please
address this matter.
In accordance with Section 2.790 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice," Part 2,
Title 10, code of Federal Regulations, a copy of this letter and the enclosures
will be placed in the NRC's Public Document Room.
If this report contains any
information that you (or your contractor) believe to be proprietary, 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 be
accompanied by an affidavit executed by the owner of the information, which
identifies the document or part sought to be withheld, and which contains a
statemen: of reas m s which addresses with specificity the items which will be
considered by the Commistion as listed in subparagraph (b) (4) of Section
2.790.
The information sought to be withheld shall be incorporated as far as
possible into a separate part of the affidavit.
If we do not hear from you in
this regard within the spuified period, the report will be placed in the
Public Document Room.
Additionally, and in accordance with Section 2.790(d) of the NRC's " Rules of
Practice, Part 2, Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, documentation of
findings of your control and accounting procedures for safeguarding special
nuclear materials and your facility security procedures are exempt form dis-
closure; therefore, the pertinent section of the inspection report will not be
placed in the Public Document Room and will receive limited distribution.
Should you have any questions concerning this inspection, we will be pleased
to discuss them with you.
Sincerely,
-
/0
ff ' I/
,/f GC j
/'
M
!
Boyce H. Grier
,
Director
Enclosures:
1.
Appendix A, Notice of Violation
2.
Office of Inspection and Enforcement
Report No. 50-219/80-03
(Contains 2.790 Information)
cc (w/o pages 15 and 16 of Report):*
J. T. Carroll, Station Superintendent
R. J. Hunter, Manager, Safety and Security
Contains 10 CFR 2.790 Information
l
..
.
. - . .
_
-
._
-.
-
-
'
-
.
O
Inspection 80-03
APPENDIX'A
4
Jersey Central Power and Light Company
Docket No. 50-219
License No. DPR-16
.
Based on the results of an NRC inspection conducted on January 21-25, 1980, it
!
appears that certain of your activities were not conducted in full compliance
,
with NRC regulations and the conditions of your license as indicated below.
i
Items A, B, and D are Infractions. Item C is a Deficiency.
1
A.
10 CFR 20.201, " Surveys", states in Paragraph (b), "Each licensee shall
make or cause to be made such surveys as may be necessary for him to
'
comply with the regulations in this part." A survey as defined in Para-
graph 20.201(a) means, "an evaluation of the radiation hazards incident
to the production, use, release, disposal, or presence of radioactive
materials or other sources of radiation under a specific set of conditions.
When appropriate, such evaluation includes a physical survey of the
location of materials and equipment, and measurements of levels of radiation
or concentrations of radioactive material present."
10 CFR 20.202, " Personnel Monitoring" states in Paragraph (a) that "Each
licensee shall supply appropriate personnel monitoring equipment to, and
shall require the use of such equipment by . . . (1) Each individual who
enters a restricted area under such circumstances that he receives, or is
likely to receive, a dose in any calendar quarter in excess of 25 percent
of the applicable value specified in paragraph (a) of 6 20.101."
Contrary to the above, as of January 25, 1980, individuals entering parts
of the restricted area were exposed to intensities of beta radiation up
to 1500 mrad /hr and a survey was not performed to determine if appropriate
personnel monitoring devices were required or provided pursuant to 10 CFR 20.202.
B.
10 CFR 20.103(c), " Exposure of individuals to concentrations of radioactive
,
.
materials in air in restricted areas" requires in part that: When respira-
"
tory protective equipment is used to limit the inhalation of airborne
radioactive material pursuant to paragraph (b)(2) of this section, the
licensee may make allowance for such use in estimating exposure of indivi-
duals to such materials provided that such equipment is used as stipulated
in Regulatory Guide 8.15, " Acceptable Programs for Respiratory Protection."
4
9
$$09000 M
- -
.
~
_.
-
. . -
.
-
.
.
_ . _ _ _
.
.
. _ . .
__
__
_
' '
.
.
A
2
Section c.4 of Regulatory Guide 8.15 states in part, "The licensee is to
maintain and implement a. respiratory protection program that includes, as
.
a minimum...e. Written operational and administrative procedures for con-
-
trol, issuance, proper use, and return of respiratory protective equipment..."
,
>
L
Contrary to the above, as of January 23, 1980, no adequate operational or
1
administrative procedures addressing control and issuance of breathing air
fittings was included in the licensee's respiratory protection program.
Licensee procedure 915.5 addressed responsibility for this area, however,
'
this guidance was inadequate to prevent improper use of the fittings.
i
.
C.
10 CFR 20.203(f) requires that each container of licensed material shall
bear a durable,. clearly visible label identifying the radioactive contents.
The label shall bear the radiation caution symbol and the words
.
i
" Caution Radioactive Material"
i
or
!
" Danger Radioactive Material"
The label shall also provide sufficient information to permit individuals
!
handling or using the containers, or working in the vicinity thereof to
1
take precautions to avoid or minimize exposures.
'1.
Contrary to the above, on January 21, 1980, two 4' x 4' x 6' containers
located outsidt .he Old Radwaste Building contained licensed radio-
active material and were not labeled and no exemption applied.
2.
Contrary to the above, on January 25, 1980, two 55 gallon drums
3
located on the floor of the torus contained licensed radioactive
material and were not labeled and no exemption applied.
The drums
indicated up to 5000 millirem /hr on' contact.
,
1
D.
Technical Specification 6.11, " Radiation Protection Program" requires
that procedures for personnel radiation protection shall be prepared
'
consistent.with the requirements of 10 CFR Part 20 and shall be approved,
maintained and adhered to for all operations involving personnel radiation
'
i
exposure.
t
1.
Procedure 902.7, Revision 1, "Drywell Occupancy and Evacuation
During Fuel Handling Operation", developed pursuant to the above,
,
l
requires in section 5.4 that the alarm set point of the radiation
i
monitors shall have alarm set' points set between two and five times
,
the value of the background in the area of the detector.
j
Contrary to the above, during fuel movement on January 24, 1980, at
9:00 p.m. one of the two' radiation monitors, used for evacuation
!-
.,
_
_
- - .
- _
- . _ , .
. _ , - _ . . , _ _ _ _ _ , - , . , , _ - - . _
_ , . _
.
- .
.
.
3
purposes, was found to have an alarm set point twelve (12) times the
value of the background in the area of the detector.
2.
Procedure 915.7, Revision 0, " Personnel Monitoring", developed pur-
suant to the above, states . in section 5.3, "the TLD and self-reading
dosimeters shall normally be worn in the front of the body between
the head and waist".
Contrary to the above, on January 21, 1980, one individual was
observed wearing his TLD and self-reading dosimeters suspended about
three inches below and behind his belt against the left rear pocket.
The individual was operating an instrument calibrator containing
161.4 curies of Cs-137.
The location of the dosimeters precluded
proper personnel monitoring in the event of the calibrator monitor
failure.
3.
Procedure 9.11.1, Revision 0, " Radioactive Waste Material Storage",
developed pursuant to the above, states in procedure section 5.1,
.
that "all radioactive waste material shall be stored in such a
manner so as to reduce to a minimum:
. . 5.1. 2 The radiation exposure
dose rates for working personnel."
Contrary to the above, on January 24, 1980, radioactive waste was
found at the personnel entrance to the torus and on the torus catwalk
emanating contact dose rates of 40 millirem /hr and 3000 millirem /hr,
respectively.
Personnel, in going to and from their work locations,
repeatedly passed by the drums of waste and were at times observed
to be leaning against the drums at the torus entrance.
,
e
---
,
,