ML20107B390
Text
. ~.
l 1
u
~.
{
MAR 8 D" i
{
l l
Jersey Central Power and Light Company uucket No. 50-219 Attention: Mr. R. H. Sims
(
Vice Prealdent 1
Madison Avenue at Punch Bowl Road i
Morristown, New Jersey 07960 l
[
Gentlemen:
4 This refers to the inspection conducted by Mr. Cantrell of this office i
om November 9 and 10, 12 and 13, 17, 20, and December 7 and 8, 1972 of activities authorized by AEC' License No. DPR-16 and to the discussions of our findings held by Mr. Cantrell with Messrs. McCluskey, Riggle, 1
Sullivan and Reeves at.the conclusion of the inspection, and to subse-
)
quant telephone discussions between Mr. McCluskey and Mr. Cantrell on t
December 12, 13, 19, 20, 1972 and January 26 and 30, 1973.
Areas examined during this inspection included: administrative con-a trols; operation during the period. July 15 through December 8, 1972; surveillance testing; the radwaste operating foreman's log for the j
period October 3 to November 17, 1972; the radwaste log for the period i
November 10 - 17,.1972; radiation survey records for the period November l
1 - 17, 1972; the report by the General Office Review Board Ccessittee that investigated the twelve exposures in excess of three rem / quarter f
during the second quarter of 1972, and the controls instituted to prevent
.l recurrence; facility procedures; the schedule for regenerating condensate j
and clean-un desaineralizers; the controls instituted to assure the correct i
sequence of control rod withdrawal when the rod worth minimizer is inop-erable; flaking observed on irradiated fuel channels; specifications for the torus - drywell isolation valves; malfunction experience with remote l
operated valves in safeguard systems; organisation changes reported in l
j your letter to the Directorate of Licensing' dated November 10, 1972; the-l circumstance relating to abnormal occurrences (AO) discussed in your reports to the Directorate of Licensing dated August 11 (two AO's), 22, 28, Sep-tamber 28 (two AO's), October 6. November 22, and December 7 and 19,1972; the circumstances relating to a defective control rod drive selector switch on August 15, 1972, and the inoperable manual close switch for main staan l
isolation valve NSO4B on December 3, 1972. Within these areas, the inspec-i tion consisted of selective e==ination of procedures and representative records, interviews with personnel, measurements made by the inspector, and observations by the inspector.
l i
i f
I 1
omca >
... CRESS.:I.,
.......y.......
t i
e sum = >
..canErelliss..
.c tan
.. c - 1 w n...
..o'liiny.:
h DATE >
..b.f.S.f.N..
Free AEC-Sts (Rev. 9-M) AECM 0240 L
DEKOK95-258 PDR _
f.
7
~.
During this inspection, it was uf ound that certain of your activities The items and refer-enpeared to be in violation of AEC requirements.
ences to the pertinent requiremente are Jf.rf ed :.n the enclosure to this This letter constitutes a ne' ice sent to you pursuant to the provisions of Section 2.201 Part 2. Title 10, Code of Federal Regulattens.
letter.
Section 2.201 requires you to submit to this office within 20 days of your receipt of this notice, a written statement of explanation in repiv, l
(1) corrective steps which have been or will be taken by you, including:
and the results achieved; (2) corrective steps which vill be taken to I
avoid further violations; and '(3) the date when full compliance will be Ve note that the above information was supplied in your letters to the Directorate of Licensing reporting Item Nos. 3, 5 and 6; therefore achieved.
no additional information is recuired relative to these three itens in your response to this letter.
Vith respect to the proPran you have instituted to control personnel exposures as a result of ti;e investigation of the exposure of twelve men in excess of three rem c'uring the April - June 1072 quarter, we have no further question; however, your reports of these exposures dated August 10 and Septenber 14, 1972 to the Director of the Direc-the reporting requirenents torate of Regulatory Operations did not neet The specific deficiencies were identified in a separate of 10 CFR 20.
1cteer to you fron the Director of the Directorate of Regulatory Oper-therefore, your reply to the specific deficiencies shdhld be to ations:
the Director of the Directorate of Regulatorv Operations.
In your letter dated August 7P, la72 to the Directorate of Licensing reportint a vf olation of the ?otal activity linit in the outside rad-the vaste tanks, you specifica113 'tated for corrective action that OST to insure concentrated vaste tank alarn vill he set no bigher thanIt is our understanding, that the tanF high Icvel alarn is operable.
based on the reference discussions, that you vill conduct a special study of the function of each individual tank in the radvaste systen to see if 95T should be the maximun allowable high level alaro set point on all tanks in the radvaste systen and implenent this as a requirement We will review this matter during a future inspection.
as appropriate.
In addition, it is our understanding, based on the above discussion, that when the rod worth minimizer is inenerable, the additional control roon operator that is assigned to verify the correct sequence of control rod i
4
. It is siso our-withdrawal vill use and fill out a separate checl. list.
understanding that you will make a copy of your procedure for transferrint irradiated fuel channel samples to a shipping cask available to this office I_
for review prior to transferring these samples to the shipping eask.
Should you have any questions concerning this inspection, we vi11 he pleased to discuss them with you.
Sincerely, Jaces F. O'Re11]v Director
Enclosure:
Description of Violations Mr. T. J. !!cCluskey, Station Superintendent cc:
R0 Chief, Reactor Test and Operations Branch, HQ bec:
RO:HQ (4)
Directorate of Licensing, HQ (4)
DR Central Files PDR Local PDR NSIC DTIE State of New Jersey
.