ML20107B000
See also: IR 05000219/1973007
Text
, ,
-
-.
.
--
- -
.
-
..
~
-
-
~!
' f,
l
.
,
'
,
.
a
v-
<
I:n; .
kjj
. fv
~
R.H. Smiti, Acting Senior, Facilities Radiological Section,
Directorate of Regulatory Operations
.
RO INSPECTION REPORT No. 50-219/73-07
JERSEY CENTRAL POWER & LIGHT COMPANY
t
OYSTER CREEK
The subject inspection had been scheduled'for April 19-20, 1973 to
,
follow up on corrective actions that the licensee had defined in their
response to the violations 'and safety items identified during the inspec-
tion of February 13-16, 1973. On April 17, RO:I received a report from
C. Amato, New Jersey DEP, about alleged overexposures at Oyster Creek.
The allegations were reported to Amato, by telephone, by an unidentified
caller. Amato was told that an inspection was scheduled and that this
would be included. As a result of this information the inspection was
advanced by one day and commenced on April 18.
i
Findings during the inspection failed to confirm that overexposures
had occurred during the current outage as alleged.
It was noted;
however, that high airborne concentrations had been experienced during
-reactor head removal. A review of'the licensee's evaluations indicated
- that individuals involved had not been exposed in excess of 40 MPC hours.
]
- The individuals involved, among others, received whole body counts as
, .
a followup. Results were not available at the conclusion of the inspection.
- W4
1
Relative to findings pertinent to correcting and resolving the previous
violations and safety items, it was determined that the licensee was
,
making progress, The specific violations had been corrected or corrective
3
action initiated. None were noted to be recurring. With respect to
management controls and upgrading of the radiation protection program, it
was noted that-the licensee was pursuing corrective actions.
In the in-
spector's opinion, staffing and reorganization of this function is para-
,
mount to resolution of their problems.
.
The station superintendent stated that they were giving priority attention
l
to interviewing people for the new positions being established for conduct
of the radiation protection program. Reportedly the top man, reporting
directly - to the station superintendent , will be a certified health physi-
cist, with full responsibility. They are trying to fill this position
first, so that he can have some choice in the selection of others. This
,
sounds reasonable; however, I suggested that they move along on this
because we would be watching this area for appropriate and timely action.
Other changes in management. occurred the first of April. Joe Carroll,
~
Operations Supervisor, replaced McCluskey as station Superintendent, and
q
D.; Reeves , Technical Engineer, was named Operations Supervisor. Maybe
I
,
a
t)?
. ..
,
.9604150243 960213
P
'
'
.
PDR- FOIA
i
r
INEKOK95-258
.
-
-
.
,.
!
. __
_. _
,
. ..
,
,
.
.
-2-
.some new blood at the top'will'be of'some value. It is the inspector's
opinion that. reorganization alone will not resolve the management control
j
problems. ' I' have 'n _c'is tinct feeling that the rappot t between management
-
and the workers leaves a lot to be desired. Without the cooperation of.
.,
,
those people, management.is dead in the water. ' Carroll seems to be
cognizant of this aspect.
,
In general,obser: rations by the inspector. showed that efforts were being
directed to some of the immediate problems. Housekeeping was significantly
r
improved,. the radwaste building had been cleaned, and more importantly.
i
the solid waste inventory was getting good attention.
1
I'would recommend a reinspection for followup purposes in three or four
months. That inspection should include a more detailed look at the
program.
In the meantime the principal inspector should keep posted on
,
the management control aspects. I think that a " management systems
inspection" would be in order.
'
,
f.
9??<qn
-
R.J.
eyer
Radiation Specialist
'
t
cc:
R. Carlson
'
$F81
I
i
i
i
'
5
i
1
>
4
t
P
9
4
g
i '
'
i
.
!
,.,n
<
. . . .
t ,_ j n ,. . ,., ;. s,..
l l , , g . ,,,,
,
,, ,
~ . , u . .. . . . . . . w. . e i . . . n u e si .. e.
r ,se....u,.
i
..
, _ _ . _ . _ . . _ _ _ _ _ . . . _ - -
., o in . .r ., a .. , ,,. .o
nus
an a=o
~ . . .
,
J
RQ INSPECfl0N RCf0RTJiOJ0-219/73-07 /.
/1//,
. . . _ ,
r.
_
II. 'D. '1.hornburg.
(/,L./L64p
.
-
' ' ' ' '
.te rse f centrni Tower & Licht comp.inv
. ..
Chief. FS&CB
'y i
'
/
n ster Creek
!
!
y o rn . . . n , ,,..o
nonau
atuanas
,
t i :
cc:
no:llQ (5)
The subject inspection report is forwarded for
i
'
ej
DR Central Files
i,j jj
Reg. Standards (3 icarc
your information.
Distribution vill be mado
,
- i
Directorate of
,
Licen sint: (13)
by this office to the PDR, LPDR, NSIC, DTIC
'
i o (n.w.. . .s , ,a.o
.Nd l Ad
MMARQ
.
.; ;l
R0 Regional Direc : ors
and State represcrLtptives after revicu by
,t.
- 1
ia
c^rc
the licensee for proprietary information.
i i. f
(.
.
Il
I
,
rnoea (n.m..aa .n.<>
rosanns
i .'
P. R. Melson
,
. Y) /.'Ihk
'
,
,
.
i.
t,
i
)
9
Pis0Nc 14
DAIC
!8
5-30 '3
i!3,
usc or,ita uoc ron ,conio it ac aae
c,o , nu o . .
,
- i
-
.- _
. - . ,-. . m %. .,- . rn.
-
- . . . . . , , -
- . . . . .
. *
..
-
,.r....
.,'
, . , . . , ,
[:(
r.
.
.
,
, ;3
-
,
.-
.,
.
. . , . .
.;< ' ~ ,
-
. ,. .
.
.
.
.. . g
.s.
.
,,
..
.
- .
. .
. . . .
.%
.
(*-
, ,1 ,g -
- ~
b
8
e, f
".
,
g
-
. ..p
'g'.
.;y
,, ,, *
- >.
.-
-o. ._
,
-ll
' 6 .' ':# '
. ' ,
e ..
,
,,
q
,l ! . ,-
- (...
- * " ' .
Os.
- ,
.
,j,,...,.,'
g
.
.'s
.
.
.$
I
'*
,
+%,
s
.
. ,s.;
. . *
.
. ; s.
.'
.
- ,,g
- , i'<j.-
,
<
.
,,
.,
.
-
.*.s,.
.g ,...
,,
2,
g
, .
- I.
8
.
,p
,'d.'"
E'
- '
.
-, .*
,
,
..
~.#
.,
,k
!
'
,
.
-
.
.
. . , -
.
.
.
,_
e
(
.
..
.
,
.
.
,.
-,
I
.,
f
p
m. . .
,.
.
.
-
,
..
-
- e
\\
. . " , ,'
s' &
. . '
',
.*e
}Y'
9
p
.
,
.
.
.-
.
.
.. .,
.
.
i.
li
-
,.
e
4
I
'
i
1
- . .
. - - - . .
- - - .
..e
--
-
, - , , - , - . .
.-