ML20087A743
Text
.... -.
w:9 yd[..
Q.
UNITED STATES e ~ +..
f
+
ATOMIC ENERGYCOMMISSIO T4 navesson or couruanca a0 e4s. 3941'
- c I[ f < 1.,
evo sRoAD STREET.
- l. 1-nao oM i my NEWARK. NEW JERSEY 07808 r
y 4
p Dscamber-17, 1969
~
J. P.'O'Reilly, Chief, Reactor Inspection
,d
-and Enforcement Branch, Division of Compliance, HQ l
JERSEY CENTRAL POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY (0YSTER CREEK) f J4 -
DOCKET NO. 50-219 1
.th The attached report of an announced inspection visit to the subject facility on November 4-6, 8 and 9, 1969 is forwarded-for information. No items-of i
safety significance were identified; however, three items of noncompliance were
)
noted for which a Form AEC-592 was issued. The items were as follows:-
j 4
1.
Failure of the General Office Review Board to audit, plant operations at
]
the required frequency.
- I
'l 2.
Failure to maintain reactor building containment integrity during plant
]
operation.
i t
I 3.
Failure to review and approve continuance of the power ascension test -
l program per the requirements of 10 CFR 50.59 following failure of the
{
hot reactor internals vibration test equipment.
7 In addition to the above items of noncompliance, several other items of con-t l
cern were identified. These includes g.
f, 1.
The termination of one of the two Assistant Technical Engineers.
2.
The failure in at least one instance of a JC Shift Foreman to exert l
1 himself to the extent necessary for complete shift takeover once his GE counterpart leaves.
i
[
3.
The failure of the licensee to obtain permanent replacements for th'e -
?
Maintenance and Chemical Supervisors.
{
t 4.
The improper (nonconservative) setting of the stack gas monitor alarm.
q Because of the above and previously identified' areas of concern, discussed in-earlier inspection reports, a special meeting was h. eld with licensee management I
on November 10, 1969. The results of that meeting are documented in CD Report j
No. 219/69-12 t
I s
9500070150 950227
^
- +
.4
't
V y.f
- / l l
.I More results of the power ascension test program are discussed.
Several.im-portant tests were witnessed by our inspector.
F.
Our record of the licensee scram. experience is made current in the report. Five O
scrams have been experienced since the September 1969 visit. One scram, related
[.
to the five pump trip test, revealed an area of possible technical conflict in
~
[
the technical specifications, since resolved by Change No. 1.
- 'l I
0 The health physics program was reviewed. Aside from the item regarding the l
stack monitor alarm setting, the overall program appeared satisfactory.
l M
i
[
A problem with rod block interlocks has been identified. ' The licensee has since submitted a proposed change (No. 2) to the Technical Specifications in i
this regard.
The identified and unidentified reactor coolant leakages into containment were determined to be 5 spm and 3.3 gpm respectively.
/
i N.
L --
Robert T. Carlson l
Senior Reactor Inspector
Enclosure:
5.i CO Report No. 219/69-11'
.i by R. T. Dodds dated 12/11/69 i
1\\
f cc:
E. G. Case, DRS l
R. S. Boyd, DRL (2)
S. Levine, DRL (6)
D. J. Skovholt, DRL (3)
L. Kornblith, Jr., CO Regional Directors, 00 REG files i
j l
i a
ii i
i i
- e p.
di ons.
.cn.
i y
sa.
es*
j s.s yt e.
e iis.
. r**4 a
..(
{
/
i e
+
---M
,5
-4 e.-
I J
t