ML20106J838
Text
m.
. i,? 4 p
0. 4' i 'l i
,f
{
7 Y
psss to#*f, A
UNITED STATES
. y'.dS ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION '
L s
W ASHINGTON. D C.
20S4S "em. U NOV 2119/3 Commissioner Richard J. Sullivan New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection Trenton, New Jersey 08625
~
Dear Mr. Sullivan:
This is in further reply to your letter of September 27, 1973, concerning allegations about AEC licensee operations at the Oyster Creek nuclear power plant. As I stated in my letter to you of October 9, 1973, the Regulatory staff initiated their investigation of the Oyster Creek allegations on a priority basis. A copy of its Investigation Report is enclosed for your information. The names of the individuals interviewed have been omitted from the investigation report in the interest of protecting their privacy.
I have also enclosed the Report of a Special Inspection c.onducted by 3
the Regulatory staff on September 10-12, 1973, of the incident that sub-sequently resulted in the allegations that were referred to you. This inspection was unannounced to the licensee and is in accordance with our routine procedure following unusual abnormal occurrences. As you will note, the findings from the Special Inspection and the Investiga-i tion are identical in regard to substantive issues.
To give you a more complete picture of the actions taken by the Regulatory staff related to this abnormal occurrence, I have also enclosed copies of letters sent by the Regulatory staff to the l
' licensee as a result of the Special Inspection and the Investigation.
)
As you know, the Regulatory staff routinely sends to the State of New l
Jersey copies of all letters relating to inspections, including Inspection Reports, when appropriate, for activities licensed by the AEC in the State of New Jersey. These letters and teports are addressed to the Department of Environmental Protection in accordance with informal agreements with your Governor's office.
j l
In summary, our evaluation of these specific Oyster Creek allegations reconfirmed that no abnormal releases of radioactive materials occurred, that no damage to the plant was sustained, and that the health and safety of the public was not jeopardized. Additionally, a design change has been made to the diesel generators to correct the problem noted in the allegations..
9604120019'960213 i
v
(.
2 Conaissioner Richard,J.
Sullivan.
On the broader' issue of the safety of operations at the Oyster Creek
' plant, AEC Regulatory staff is concerned-about the number of problems that have occurred and the large number of violations of AEC require-ments that have been identified in past inspections. Although there is no one specific matter of serious concern, the number and scope of the problems lead us to conclude that significant icrprovements are necessary.
Independent of the specific Oyster Creek allegations re-ferred to you, the Regulatory staff had increased its inspection efforts at the site and had conducted meetings with senior management personnel, including the president, of the Jersey Central Power & Light Company.
In addition, a meeting was held on November 5, 1973, with the president of General Public Utilities to discuss these matters.
If this meeting does not result in substantive improvements, based on the results of augmented AEC inspection efforts, further actions by the AEC will be forthcoming.
Our staff has several enforeccent options available to it including notices'of violations, civil monetary penalties, and orders to modify, suspend or revoke operating licenses.
In closing, I would like to thank you for your kind words about our AEC degional office staff. The Cocmission likes to think it has 1
assigned to the field top flicht personnel to nonitor the activities of our licenses, and your comments confirmed our belief.
If I can 1
provide you with any further information, please feel free to' contact me.
1 Distribution:
Sincerely, Chairman (2)
Commissioner Larson
[g Commissioner Kriegsman Commissioner Anders Secretariat (2)
William O. Doub Commissioner L.M. Huntzing J.D. Peters
Enclosures:
L.V. Gossick 1.
Investigation Report #73-01 J.F. O' Leary j
dtd October 29, 1973 L. Rogers j
D.F. Knuth 2.
Special Inspection Report J.G. Davis
)
- 73-15 dtd October 26, 1973
'3.
Ltr relating to the Inspection J.P. O'Reilly G. Ertter j
dtd October 29, 1973 4.
Ltr relating to the Special Inspection, dtd October 26, 1973 I
SEE PREVIOUS YELLOW FOR CONCURRENCES M. _.. _. _ _. E1: P*M.0,,,,,,, b,p,:,@,R,,,,,,,
,,,,,M,,,,,,,,,,,
rrier>
'HC#840612 cls
\\
4
\\\\ \\
\\mh,k ~///
m JCDat hV--.. _
._DE h tn i_.
_L. @ ntz_(ng,,.
j sunsaur>,JJThorgpxg.:1
' -'11/16/7'4 ~
i
- o^">. 11/... IU....... 1111. 73_.....11/... m....
................. 11L 17 3.....
Form ALC 3;I(Rev, f 53) ACCM 0:40 L., a co..awree...ima ce reca ee s
.-....s..
It
+
(
gag g
State of Nrm Flerary.
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION TMENTON 00625 OFFCE OF THE COMMISSIONER September 27, 1973 Certified Mail #9836 Commissioner William O. Doub United States Atomic Energy Commission 1717 H Street, Northwest Washington, D. C.
20545
Dear Commissioner Doub:
Refer to: USAEC Docket 50-219 NJPUC Docket 60-652
'A number of years ago the State Government of New Jersey was presented with allegations concerning irregularities connected with the construction of the primary loop for the l
Oyster Creek Nuclear Elect'ic Generating Station Unit No. 1.
i r
The allegations were transmitted to Dr. Roscoe Kandle, who then headed Governor Hughes's Atomic Energy Council.
Dr. Kand:
elected to advise the then Division of Compliance of these allegations.
I am happy to write that the AEC, specifically Mr. Robert Kirkman, then Director of Region I, Division of Compliance, responded immediat21y and undertook an investigatic which essentially substantiated the allegations.
Appropriate corrective action was undertaken.
We have been in receipt of a number of anonymous telephonc allegations concerning irregularities at Oyster Creek during operation.
Some of these allegations if substantiated may
)
have rather severe consequences with respect to the availabilit i
of a safety system of the reactor when needed and the overall health and safety of the general public.
I am attaching to thi letter allegations from a source with the request that an immediate appropriate investigation be undertaken.
The Commission' is further requested to advise this State Government as to the findings and if indeed the allegations are confirmed, what corrective action can and is being taken.
Specifically, did a loss of total electric power take place resulting in inability for any length or time to effect forced convection cooling; and.if so, did this result in clad defects and therma 2 stresses resulting in core structural' damage.
Finally, is there any substance to the allegation that an abnormal release also occurred.
N 0?O30.2s' 2pp
e-Commissionc. Doub September 27, if The allegations relating to an abnormal occurrence were first called to the attention of this Department in an unusual manner.
A reporter, John Allen of the Atlantic City Fress, called this Department's twenty-faur hour line about 9 p.m.
on September 8 and was put in touch with our Nuclear Engineer, Charles Amato.
Mr. Amato in turn contacted Mr. J.
P. O'Reilly of your King of Frussia office and the New Jersey State Police (per standard procedures).
Mr. O'Reilly responded immediately and called the plant and the plant superintendent (at his home:
then advised Mr. Amato of his findings which did not suggest a core melt-down or near melt-down as the allegations implied.
At a meeting on September 14, Mr. O'Reilly discussed the matte:
with Mr. Amato, advised him a Reactor Inspector had visited Oyster Creek on September 11, and gave Mr. Amato a copy of Oyster Creek Abnormal Occurrence Report No. 73-19, which is PDI material (this abnormal occurrence had been reported to the AEC on the morning of September 8).
A copy of the just noted Abno2 Occurrence Report is attached for the sake of completeness.
)
I would be remiss if I failed to commend Mr,. O'Reilly for his
~
cooperation and timely response.
We have come to expect this c Mr. O'Reilly and his Staff.
You may be interested in noting that two unusual or abnort occurrences took place at. Oyster Creek about a month apart.
Er took place on-a Friday'or Saturday preceding a Lacey Township Planning Board public meeting scheduled to determine if a Builc' Permit should be issued for the Forked River Station.
I am looking forward to receiving at the earliest possibic date your findings in this investigation.
y truly yours j
s, w,
Richard J.
ullivan Commissioner Encl.
4 5
e
't
(
m.s
- e
/c
(
Fron phono conversation with infornant 9/9/73 g.
Shutting down for repair of the snubbers (shock absorbers) the dry well, approximately 30 of thon. They were supposed to sh
'down around midnight, but for some reason they held it off until around dayli ht yesterday morning. They scramned the reactor to 6
brinZ it down and they switched over to..their emergency bankd fc cloctric and they got a blackout from it.
This left all their equipment inoperable in the whole plant
.They had no electric. This would be their core spray syste=, as understand it, even their boron system whicV is the last resort shooting uhat they call their poison system in these pumps to pu.
thisboronandwatermixtureintothereactortokik1thefissic!
During this titee, the wator lovel in the reactor, becaune c:
I the pumps not being operable to bring water into the reactor, di:
ipated down to the dangerous level of 16 inches.
--At one point at one minuto (the water level) was 6 ft.,
another ninute 31", then down to 19", then down to 16", which us:
the lowest point it went. This is water level, I believe, approx.
instely above the fuel assembly.
Everybody that was on the job yeste,rday was ausro of the prc i
len. Electricians on the job when this happened. Thair boss was A lot of times he won 8t be in (on the night shift)... Fortunatc1;.
he was in and he was able to put his fingar on it (the pro.blon) l and got the power back on. If he hadn't been thoro I don't think 1
anybody oise was there with that kind of kaculo.Jge.
M03E
~~
~
=.S,; -
(
i 7
The trouble was from the electricians themselves. In the
[
lost shut'down they had.the relay; department
- another depar.tm i
from out of the area - (I think Al'.enburst) they were dcwn doi:
running tests.
TheyJput a voltage reducer in one of the input electrical 4
In other words when the reactor shuts.doin1 the ' emergency banks
}
feed in the outside..back through systems that could cc=e throi their diesel generators.
l They put a tester in there which reduces the power in one
\\
these breakers down to a very minute point t'o where. they can te it with a voltage tester.
i 4
t They never took this test breaker out. It was a mistake. 3 abould havo been taken out and replaced with a normal voltage s
i breaker.
'When they switched over to emergency power with the reactc i
coming down, this little test thing just " popped" because it couldn't handle any amount of juice trying to get over it, inte the plant for emergency operations.
So they had a complete blackout. As the electricians put i they didn't have enough-power to open the front gate.
Words of a veteren control room operator: He was "scarsd".
He switched to the coarse spray pumps-and they wouldn't wo
- switched to other. pumps couldn't-get any powar; finally switchs to the encrgency diesel generator, but the control room usa get-ting'en inoperable signal.
Even-though the diesel generst'crs started, the juice was
)
being cut off before it got to the-pisnt..Befora it got into tho
\\
control center where they could'make use of it, it uas being
(:
l
.j
(
-3.
s cut,off by this little test breaker.
4 All this time, the punpa weren 't bringing any recircul wat'er back into the reactor. The reactor was getting s ae uss dissipating all this water in there into steam and was d a
ping this water level down to a very dangsrous point rop-There was an abnormal release into the atmosphere
... I don'-
know if it went above the AEC restrictions.
Also have a very high zenon content in the air of the d well, which they haven 't opened up yet.
ry The general feeling of everyone I heard speak there 4
esterda was they came too close for comfort. Definitely many peo e " shoo.
up there yes'terday."
Joe Carroll, new plant superintendant and Don Reoves I
, operat!
supervisor, came stormin6 in there around 6:30 (A M )
.... Joe Carrc jumped out of his car while it was still moving There are many guys who uon't say what they tiiink b their job. Even those who laughed at Nador and Ster ecause of nglas said yesterday that they believe there should bs a complete in and testing should be run on this thing to make sure n vestigati: !
o damage has been done before they let them start it up
... They think much stricter safety standards shou 1B be imposed on the pow i
for the operation of this plant. These are guys er company (uho have little) concern or responsibility.
/
(
Another workman. stated in & conversation.that he had heard that the low-low alarm for the reactor cooling water was activated.
He further stated that a clock in the plant-was
-14 minutes slow indicating that.they were without power for-
~
that period of time.
He also stated that he' heard that they had'some trouble with the diesel generators, but did not.know what it was.
/
i 1
e 4
e a
i 1
R H
p' r