ML20059F752

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Ack Receipt of Informing NRC of Steps Taken to Correct Violations Noted in Insp Rept 50-219/93-19 on 930910
ML20059F752
Person / Time
Site: Oyster Creek
Issue date: 10/29/1993
From: Joyner J
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
To: J. J. Barton
GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITIES CORP.
References
NUDOCS 9311050067
Download: ML20059F752 (2)


See also: IR 05000219/1993019

Text

. - - . .

-.

..

.

.

.

- . ..

-

+

f

..

,

,

OCT 2 91993

,

Docket No. 50-219

>

.

Mr. John J. Barton

Vice President and Director

GPU Nuclear Corporation

Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station

P.O. Box 388

Forked River, New Jersey 08731

Dear Mr. Barton:

Subject:

Inspection No. 50-219/93-19

This letter refers to your October,

8,

1993 correspondence, in response to our

September 10,1993 letter.

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 program.

Your cooperation with us is appreciated.

Sincerely,

.

Original Signed By:

James H. Joyner -

James H. Joyner, Chief

Facilities Radiological Safety

'

and Safeguards Branch

Division of Radiation Safety

and Safeguards

,

cc:

M. Laggart, Manager, Corporate Licensing

G. Busch, Manager, Site Licensing, Oyster Creek

Public Document Room (PDR)

Local Public Document Room (LPDR)

Nuclear Safety Information Center (NSIC)

NRC Resident Inspector

State of New Jersey

OFFICIAL RECORD COPY

G:OC9319.RL

October 22,1993

p

p

~9

kh

h.

9311050067 931029

PDR

ADDCK 05000219

l g,

V

G

PDR

I t

'

i

- . ,

~

,

, . - . . .

..

. - - , .

-

- . _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ - _

.

.8

GPU Nuclear Corporation

2

,

bec:

Region I Docket Room (with concurrences)

bec (VIA E-MAIL):

V. McCree, OEDO

J. Stolz, NRR/PD l-4

A. Dromerick, NRR/PD l-4

4

e

i

l

RI:DRSS

RI:DRSS

RI:DRSS

fh"YI'#

_ f )/

$f

10/pg/93

109t/93

10/2//93

-

i

OFFICIAL RECORD COPY

G:OC9319.RL

October 22,1993

5

.

..-

,

, _ _ _ .

..

_ . _ _ . _ . . _ _

,. . . , . .

I :. *

~

.,

.

.

.

4

GPU Nuclear Corporation

l

g

'

,

y

Q

f

Post Office Box 388

Route 9 South

Forked River. New Jersey 08731-0388

609 971-4000

Writer's Direct Dial Nurnber:

October 8,1993

C321-93-2282

U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Att: Document Control Desk

Washington, DC 20555

~-

Dear Sir:

Subject:

Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station

Docket No. 50-219

Inspection Report 50-219/93-19

Response to Notices of Violation

Appendix A of USNRC Inspection Report 50-219/93-19 identified two Notices of

Violation. Attachment I to this letter provides the GPU Nuclear responses to those

violations.

If any additional information or assistance is required, please contact Mr. John Rogers

of my staff at 609.971.4893.

. /)

^

l

D

r

-

ohn J. B' rt n

Vice Pres

nt and Director

Oyster Creek

JJB/JJR

Attachments

Enclosure

cc:

Oyster Creek NRC Project Manager

Administrator, Region I

Senior Resident

A~

m nj3

t qGPU Nuc ear Corporation is a suoscary of Generai Pubitc Ut.%es Corporahon

I

d () L V VM-W ~

__

___-

e

p

.,

.

j

'

i

ATTACIIMENT I

.,

Violation A:

10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Paragraph IV requires, in part, that measures shall be

established to assure that applicable regulatory requirements which are necessary

to assure adequate quality are suitably included or referenced in the documents

for procurement of material, equipment, and services.

Contrary to the above, as of August 20,1993, appropriate measures were not

established to assure that adequate quality was suitably included in documents for

procurement of services, in that a contract, effective February 8,1993, was

issued to a vendor whose QA program for meteorological instrument calibration

services had not been approved by GPU Nuclear QA.

GPUN Response:

GPUN concurs with the violation as written.

Enson for the violation

This violation was caused by an oversight by the Procurement QA section

when the contract was issued without the formal review of an external

audit of the vendor in the area of calibration. The bid documents

submitted by the vendor stated that the calibration activites required by

GPUN had already been performed by the vendor at other nuclear utilities

and that an audit by another utility was available. However, GPUN did

not evaluate the audit from the other utility prior to issuing the contract.

Corrective Actions Taken and Results Achieved

The audit referenced in the vendor's bid document was reviewed by GPUN

and accepted. The computer reference to this vendor was changed to

reflect the satisfactory audit.

A review was conducted of open contracts requiring an approved audit for

specific services. No additional deficiencies were identified.

.

-

-

s' s

,

.

.

'

C321-93-2282

Attachment I

.

Page 2

GPUN considers this to be an isolated case, however, refresher training

I

was provided for appropriate personnel specifically addressing this concern.

Date when Full Compliance was Achieved

Full compliance was achieved on August 20,1993 when the evaluation of

the external audit was completed and the computer database updated.

Violation II:

Technical Specification 6.8 requires that written procedures shall be established,

implemented, and maintained that meet or exceed the requirements of the

Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Regulatory Guide 1.33, Rev.2. Regulatory

Guide 1.33, Rev. 2, Appendix A,Section I requires Administrative Procedures -

including Procedure and Approval. Procedure 1000-ADM-1218.01, written

pursuant to Regulatory Guide 1.33, states in paragraph 4.8.1 that a documented

review at least every two years is required for plans or procedures identified as

within QA scope, which includes procedures for calibration of meteorological

monitoring instrumentation.

Contrary to the above, as of August 20,1993, the licensee had no documented

biennial review of meteorological instrument calibration procedures.

GPU Response:

GPU concurs with the violation as written.

Reason for the Violation:

Prior to 1992, the results of biennial reviews of Environmental Controls

Department procedures were documented by a memo from the procedure

reviewer to the department manager or the procedure review coordinator.

In 1992, the biennial review process was revised to include the completion

of an appropriate form. The reviewer responsible for the biennial review

of the meteorological system calibration procedures acknowledged his -

responsibility to perform the requisite review, but did not fill out the new

form upon completion of his review.

_.

..

.

-

.

..

.

..

?

' C321-93-2282'

Attachment I

- Page 3

Corrective Actions Taken and Results Achieved:

The meteorological system calibration procedures were reviewed and

documented on the appropriate form on August 20,1993. The remaining

Environmental Monitoring procedures were reviewed to ensure that no

other procedures had missed a biennial review. No other concerns were

noted.

Corrective Actions to be Taken:

The bienial review of the Environmental Controls Department procedures

will be tracked by the computerized system used to ensure timely reviews

of the Oyster Creek Station procedures.

,

Date when Full Compliance will be Achieved:

Full compliance was achieved on August 20,1993 when the appropriate

documentation was completed.

i

i

i