ML20039B305
| ML20039B305 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oyster Creek |
| Issue date: | 12/16/1981 |
| From: | Haynes R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | Thompson D NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8112220507 | |
| Download: ML20039B305 (2) | |
Text
..
g.
1 G DE.C E Docket No. 50-219 MEMORANDUM FOR:
D. Thompson, Director Enforcement and Investigation Staff FROM:
Ronald C. Haynes, Regional Administrator, Region I
SUBJECT:
OYSTER CREEK PROMPT RUBLIC NOTIFICATION SYSTEM Attached is our recomended response to the licensee's reply dated October 23, 1981 to Mr. Stello's letter of September 22, 1981.
&&i [Ydm l
pRonaldC.Haynes l
Regional Administrator l
l
Enclosure:
As stated pS 9
j R EC E W s'n DEC231cg g p; j
.u,,
r
\\$#j Ild IE:R IE:RI IE lt )
IE:RI.
IE:RI IE: gd EP ' dv EP&PSB S
)
/ RITH STAROSTECKI ALLAN HAY S 12p'/81 12/ l0 /81
&12/10 /81 12/// /81 12/ g /81 1 2/ 11 /81 0FFICIAL RECORD COPY 8112gy[oh
'DR
$D" IE 35 l}
N' PROPOSED Docket No; 50-219 Jersey Central Power and Light Company ATTN: Dr. S. Bartnoff h esident Padison Avenue at Punch Bowl Road Morristown, New Jersey 07950 Gentlemen:
Subject:
Prompt Fublic Notification Systun This refers to your letter dated October 23, 1981, in et:sponse to cur letter dated September 22, 1981.
Thank you for informing us of the corrective and preventive actions documented in your letter. These actions will be examined during a future inspection of your licensed progran.
This is also to advise you that the installation of your prompt notification system a:ust be completed by February 1,1982.
Your cooperation with us is appreciated.
Sincerely, R. C. DeYoung Director cc:
P. Clark, President ti. Laggart, Licensing Supervisor J. Knubel, BWR Licensing Manager Public Document Room (PDR)
Local Public Document Room (LPDR)
Nuclear Safety Infor ation Center (flSIC)
NRC Resident Inspector State of New Jersey bcc: Region I Docket Room (with concurrences)
IE:RI IE:RI IE:RI IE:RI IE:RI IE:RI EPS EP&PSB DEPOS DRPI DRA RA
- CROCKEP, SNYDER SMITH STAROSTECKI ALLAN HAYNES 12/8/81 12/
/81 12/
/81 12/
/81 12/
/81 12/
/81 0FFICIAL RECORD COPY t
.~
3 GYGTER CREEK 41 NUCLEAR GENERATING STATISN Q,
[iBD.
/[c@ ]
a (609)e93-6000 P O BOX 395
- cC A< EC cc.'ER * '.E.'. JE;5E v + F ;'
~
October 23, 1981 Mr. Victor Stello, Jr., Director Of fice of Inspection and Enforcement U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555
Dear Mr. Stello:
Subject:
Oyster Creek Nuclear Generatind Station Ibcket No. 50-219 Notice of Violation " Prompt Public Notification System" In accordance with the provisions of 10 CFR 2.201, this letter presents our response to the Notice of Violation transmitted in your letter of Septe=ber 22, 1981.
As stated in your letter, we did not notify the NRC of our inability to meet the July 1, 1981 date.
Prior to that date, information had been received in our-of fices that cince many utilities had been unable to meet the July 1, 1981 date, the NRC staf f was in the process of initiating an extension of the completion date.
Although we were aware of our inability to meet the completion date, we had expected to complete the cystem installation within the four month period specified in 10 CFR 50.54(s)(2) for the correction of deficiencies.
Based on this projected completion and the information indicating an anticipated extension of the completion date, it was decided not to submit an exemption request.
It was never the intent to mislead the staff concerning the status of this project.
Our company policy has always been, and will continue to be, open and truthful communications concerning regulatory actions.
In order to reinforce this policy, each member of the management staff has been provided with, personal letter s'gned by the Chief Operating Executive reiterating this position.
N
).. f){
n s m I IG -
/
of } f D U :~ '
l
i' i
Should you have any questions, please contact Mr. Michael Laggart at (609) 693-6932.
Very truly yours,.
E f
u ct {
Philip R. Clark Vice President - Nuclear Jersey Central Power & Light Executive Vice President -
GPU Nuclear Signed and sworn to before me this -J # #'5 day of f.a.6 /.,.
1981.
0/ / /*
,Y *! ! s'. q, Notary Public PHYLLIS A. KABIS PRC:CWB:lse 740TARY FU:! C CF P4EW JZR5!Y Mr Commdsion Dpires Aug. 16,1984 attachment e
cc:
f fice or Inspection and Enforcement U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region I 631 Park Avenue King of Prussia, PA 19406 i
NRC Resident Inspector' Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Forked River, NJ 08731 l
I a
9
Response to Notice of Violation Prompt Public Notification System b,
Violation:
10.CFR 50.54(s)(2) and Section IV.D.3 of Appendix E, require that by July 1,1981, each nuclear power reactor licensee demonstrate that administrative and physical means have been established for alerting and providing prompt instructions to the public within the plume exposure pathway of the E=argency Planning Zone within about 15 minutes.
Contrary to the above, Jersey Central Power & Light Company was unable to demonstrate that means had been established f or alerting and promptly providing public instruction within the plume expcsure pathway of the Emergency Planning Zone within about 15 minutes, i
This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement I).
Response
The Notice of Violation is correct as stated in that the Prompt Public Notification Systim for the Oyster Creek Station Plume
- Exposure Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ) was not completed by July 1, 1981.
Reasons for the item of noncompliance
- Following publication of the Emergency Planning Rule, an engineering study was undertaken to determine the most appropriate means of providing the required prompt notification capability.
The results of this evaluation indicated that this capability could best be previded by a system of ' stationary sirens and a proposed engineering design was developed.
This dcsign was then verified by an independent source in order to assure the accuracy and completeness of the design.
This verification resulted in some changes relating to siren Jocations and the type of sirens to be installed.
Unfortunately, due to the time involved in completing-the original proposal and the subsequent verification of the design, procurement was delayed to a' point that precluded co=pleting the installation by the July 1, 1981 date.
Additionally, during this period, many problems were encountered in working with govarnmental agencies to resolve questions relating to operation, maintenance, and ownership of the installed system.
This also contributed to the inability to meet the required installation date.
l s*
~
~
-2 l
Corrective glyps which have been taken and results achieved:
Upon finalization of the engineerfr.g proposal, procurement of the system. hardware was initiated and it is now being received.
Additionally, the system design engineering and supporting acoustical engineering programs have been completed.
In the August 3, 1981 letter from Mr. J. T. Carroll, Jr. to Mr. Boyce H. Grier, it was indicated that the targ_ e:d date for system installation was October 15, 1981, contingent on obtaining the necessary right of ray.
Since then, in a meeting with the Ocean County Board of Chosen Freeholders, it was decided that the county would accept operational responsibility for the system; however, they declined to accept ownership based on advice of Counsel.
Previously, discussions with county officials indicated that the county would accept ownership, significantly minimizing zoning considerations and allowing installation of sirens on county property; therefore, an installation date of October 15, 1981, was achievable. presents a chronology of the events during the planning phase of the siren installation proposal.
In view of the Board's decision to not accept ovaership, it will be necessary to petition the Board of Public Utilities (BTU), State of New Jersey, for a blanket variance for system installation.
Con-sequently, it was net possible to meet the October 15, 1981 date. While petitioning of the BPU has been initiated, the time for review and action by the Board is beyond our control.
Currently, system installation is being accomplished as expeditiously as possible with primary emphasis on that portion of the EPZ vithin five miles of the station.
This includes obtaining individual right-of-way agreements and making all
. preparations necessary to begin installation as soon as the zoning issue is resolved.
Corrective steps which will be taken to avoid further items of noncompliance:
All measures, within the control of the company, to avoid further items of noncompliance have been taken as discussed above.
Since this proj ec't involves participation by organizations beyond company control, it is not possible to initiate actions pertaining to the performance of such organiz,ations.
s., mn_ _. _.
w-o.-~,--
- -.,.., ~ ~ ~. - --=
v -. - ~. ~
~
?
_3 Date by which full compliance will be achieved:
As mentioned earlier, it has not been possible to meet the Oc tober 15, 1981 date specified in the August 3, 1?81 letter.
Presently, the company is pursuing the installation of the siren system as expeditiously as possible in an attempt to meet the February 1,1982 date; however, much of this work is contingent on obtaining the necessary rights-of-way and a settlement of the zoning issue.
The timing of these actions is beyond the control of the company; therefore, it is not possible to commit to a definite date.
As this work progresses, the NRC will be periodically advised of the staus of this project and will be notified by December 31, 1981 as to whether or not the February 1,1982 date can be met.
Pending installation and testing of the Public ?btification System, alerting of the public will be accomplished through the Ocean County Civil Defense network using the existing alerting system; a combination of sirens, sound trucks and broadcast media.
I m
O
ATTACH' MENT 1 Chronology of Events Concerning Siren Installation In late February 1981, the Jersey Central Power & Light Company Legal Department was requested to render assistance to the Real Estate Department with respect to the acquisition of easement sites for the public alert system.
An analysis of the various state and local regulatory restraints reco=sended that the County of Ocean own and operate the siren systen to avoid the necessity for zoning approvals on either local, municipal or state levels.
This recoumendation was discuseed at a meeting at Oyster Creek on March 9,1981, and a reco==endation made t.o Jersey Central's Board of Directors to donate the siren system to the County on March 20, 1981.
During the next two conths, discussions were held with the County's Civil Defense Co==ittee, which includes a Freeholder representative.
Presentations were made to this group and the reaction appeared positive since the County could use the system for other purposes related to civil defense.
In June, a for=al agreement with the County was draf ted and forwarded to the County Counsel for review.
The form of that agreement was approved on July 1,1981.
In late July, we were advised that the County Freeholders requested certain changes in the agreement.
On August 11, 1981, Jersey Central Power & Light Company attorneys and representatives =et with the Assistant County Counsel and representatives of the County to ascertain what changes were required.
A revised draft was i= mediately prepared and forwarded.
Constant contact through the County Counsel's of fice was maintained.
Coccents on the revised agreement were received on September 2,1981.
On Septe=ber 10, 1981, Jersey Central Power & Light Company was advised that the County Freeholders had decided not to accept ownership of the siren system even though all indications to that time had been to the contrary.
Im=ediately, steps were taken to implement an alternate plan whereby Jersey Central Power & Light Company would own the sirens and the County would operate the system.
This will require New Jersey Board of Public Utilities exemption from all local zoning regulations and requirement s.
Such an alternative could not have been implemented sooner
~
without undersining the preferred County ownership plan.