ML20106J980

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Discusses Insp Rept 50-219/73-19 Re Facility Meteorology Program Which Did Not Meet Recommendations of Safety Guide 23 & at Present of Little Value.Nrc Recommends That Meteorology Requirements Be Incorporated in Facility TS
ML20106J980
Person / Time
Site: Oyster Creek
Issue date: 12/21/1973
From: Stohr J
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
To: Thornburg H
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
Shared Package
ML18039A986 List: ... further results
References
FOIA-95-258 NUDOCS 9604120090
Download: ML20106J980 (1)


See also: IR 05000219/1973019

Text

...

. . -

~.

_.

_

_

_.

.

..

.

._

.

-

l

'e

'

UNITED STAVES

i

ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION

I - *

Ot MECTOR ATE OF REGULATORY OPER ATIONS

REGION t

'

j

,

g

,

631 PARK AVENUE

'

KING OF PRUS$1 A, PENNSYLVANI A 19406

.

~

DEC 211973

H. D. Thornburg, Chief Field Support and Enfore ment Branch

,

,,

y, j i

Directorate of Regulatory Operatons, HQ

.

,

,

n.

RO Inspection Report No. 50-219/73-19

d

j

,

]

Jersey Central ".over and Light Company (Oyster Creek)

M

j

,A

The subjset inspection report is forwarded for action.

<

During the inspection of Oyster Creek's (OC) meteorology program, the

,

inspector observed that the program fell far short of meeting the

-

recommmendations of Safety Guide 23 and at present is of little value.

Details are in the enclosed RO Inspection Report and Inspector's

Evaluations. Although the licensee is en==f teed to initiating a revis-

ed program meeting Safety Guide 23 in conjuetion with construction of

a new met tower, the timetable appears vague. If the construction is

j

likely to taka quite a while before complation, as we suspect, perhaps

i

something should be done to incorporate meteorology requirements (i.e.

i

S.C.23) into OC's Technical Specifications on a more timely basis. In

any event we'd like to make sure that this area is eventually covered

'

in OC's Technical Specifications.

The OC Technical Shcifications dealing with affluent monitoring should

,

i

be revised, as necessary, to specify for each type of sampling and

i

@

analysis a mi=f== detectable activity or minimur eensitivity. This

-

l

minimism activity / sensitivity should be consister4 with Safety Guide 21.

Also confidence level (suggest 95%) should be specified for this mini ==

activity / sensitivity. In addition and also in this area, the Technical

j.

Specifications covering the repo'rting of affluent totals should specify

)

l

that error estimates be reported along with the totals.

i

'

.

J. P. Stohr, Chief

3

Environmental Protectico and

Special Programs Section

Enclosures:

.

1.

Two Inspector's Evaluations (Bores & Everett)

2.

Documentation Letter (w/ enc 1)

!

,

omca>

....C..r ,

-1..

.. /1

a

,

,

.

. . g_

.

.. . . . . .

. . . , , . . .

,.

.S). T.UL.

.

"_ _

6

Nel8

.

summaar *

k

12/19/73

l4 yW'/

'

, , , ,

Poem AEC.He (Rev 9-M) AECM 0240

9604120090 960213

'

PDR

FOIA

DEKOK95-258

PDR

..

_.

.

_

.

_,

__

.,

, _ . .

_.

_

-

.