ML20087A984
| ML20087A984 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oyster Creek |
| Issue date: | 12/10/1969 |
| From: | Higginbotham L US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC) |
| To: | Robert Carlson US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20086U000 | List:
|
| References | |
| FOIA-95-36 NUDOCS 9508070255 | |
| Download: ML20087A984 (2) | |
Text
'6 L
?
ig e.fs*
2-O u~irro = Tar==
)
c f
ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION.
L,f M
DIVISION OF COMPLIANCE 201 645 e
1 neosoN I d
F 570 BROAD STREET j.
NEWARK, NEW JERSEY 07102
[N Lf^
December 10, 1969 j
Robert T. Carlson, Senior Reactor Inspector j
Region I, Division of Compliance
_ 1, 4
JERSEY CEffrRAL POWER & LIGHT COMPANY (OYSTER CREEK -1)
?
DOCKET NUMBER 50-219 After my first visit to the facility following are some opinions, impressions, observations....
Kaulback, HP Supervisor, is a " fast-talker", literally and figuratively.
You have to separate a lot of " chaff" from his responses and explanations.
The training program for indoctrination of personnel in radiation protection procedures is good. The' original training and testing program in this area appears to have been comprehensive. New personnel are required to study the i
manual and take quizzes on each section. A final exam of about 110 questions is given. Kaulback personally supervises this training and has written the examinations which are fairly comprehensive.
c The coordination of certain duties between HP and chemistry (and other sec-tions) seems somewhat lax and responsibilities are not very clearly defined.
For example: HP section has responsibility for stack monitoring and liquid effluent monitoring. Chemistry section has responsibility for off-gas monitor-ing and process radiation monitoring in plant systems. HP section gets in-volved in the latter from the standpoint of seeing results of sampling, etc.
Instrumentation section gets involved with monitoring systems by being re-sponsible for surveillance testing pf all the equipment. Neither Kaulback j
or chemistry section appeared too knowledgeable of surveillance testing of l
monitoring systems. This lack of coordination is evident from the incident of the stack monitor setpoint discussed in the report.
Some " nit-picking" observations:
The face of the multi-point recorder for area radiation monitors is half 3
obscured by a sheet of paper listing the monitor locations and setpoints.
/
A i-9500070255 950227 fa PDR FOIA PDR DEKOK95-36
t p.
/
) {.G' O
J
/
i <
The logarithmic meter scale of one off-gas monitor recorder is printed in reverse and it is of the wrong scale for the chart paper used.
i A standing order file in the control room lists setpoints for the off-gas
[
monitor in " units" which is the scale markings on the recorder. However, I
technical specifications and OC-1 operating procedure 517, Significant In-i crease in Off-gas Release Rate, speak of release rates in pCi/sec and the f
operator (from what I saw) apparently has no cross reference between monitor p
" units" and "pCi/sec".
A good practice here would be to indicate the ap-propriate setpoint on the recorder scale (s) with an easily seen mark so the operator could, by just a visual check, see where he is operating with respect to the alarm or limit. Also it would show a malfunction by visual check if the setpoint were to be exceeded and the alarm or function did not operate.
The plant was dirty from the standpoint of general housekeeping. This was generally true from observations in all areas I visited during the inspection.
This observation is based on a comparison with other facilities and my own opinion.
()
ea fdh$
y L. Hig inbothe Radiation Specialist l
l 3
, 1 3
K f
G P
December 7, 1970 J. P. O'Rollly, Chief, Reactor Inspection & Enforcement Br.,
Division of Compliance, Headquarters
' INQUIRY MEMORANDLBi NO. 219/70-J JERSEE CENTRAL 70WER & LIGE C(MPANY (0YSTER CREEK 1)
MINI-STRETCH POWER Yucan RE The assigned inspector was contacted by Mr. T. McCluskey, Station Superintendent on December 6, 1970. He informed'the inspector of the following information:
1.
Approval for increase in the station power from 1600 MWt to 1690 MWt was granted by DRL on Decanbar 3, 1970.
- 2. - The facility was shut down on the evening of December 4,1970, to make the final modifications to the plant as required for the 1690 megawatt power level. It was reported that the station would return to power i
on the evening of December 6, 1970.
l 3.
It is planned to operate the plant at 1600 megawatts thermal under equilibrium conditions to obtain base physics and heat transfer data before increasing power level to 1690 left.
It was expected that the plant will increase to the 1690 megawatt power level-on December 10, 1970.
4.
Based on the Dresden 2 experience with the pilot valves for the auto-depressurisation va9ves, Jersey Central inspected their pilots and found problems similar to Dresden 2 Temporary modifications have been made and tested and a permanant fix is in the process of being obtained from General Electric Company.
Region I will contact the station on December 11, 1970 to review the results of the power increase. Mr. McCluskey was requested to inform Region I if any difficulties are experienced during the power increase.
s i
R. T. Carlson Senior Reactor Inspector cc:
E. G. Case, DRS (3)
.P. A. Morris, DEL
- 1. S. Boyd, DEL (2) f R. C. DeYoung, DRL (2)
O j07 l
D. J. Skovloolt, DRL (3) r u_ ua
- not in L. Ciambusso, 00 C0MPLEAN E
mp CK6sblidi,~~E",'"CO'
~ ~ ~ '
~--"
It. M. Engelkan, CO Mc TT:mac C) i '
Ilaii6s1"DifRu6H', CD f7o
~~---
om ec.a.guna.......
.y..
__me._......m.._
m....__._.=___
_ _