ML20107C313
See also: IR 05000219/1974018
Text
_.
_.
_ , . , , ,
.
..
_,, _,
p.--.,,.....
4'
- .
i
/
.
r-
-
<
.
- 4.
A.
[
RO:1 Form 12
(Cet' 74) (Rev)
'
l ~*
i
U.S. ATO:11C ENERGY C0!D11SSION
,
a, ./
DIRECTORATE OF REGULATORY OPERATIONS
$$h!
REGION I
'
RO Inspection Report No: 50-219/74-18
Docket No: 50-219
Licensec:
Jersey Central Power and Light Company
License No: DPR-16
.
Madison Avenue at Punch Bowl Road
Priority:
C
Morristown, New Jersey 07960
Cat egor-y.
'
Location:
Oyster Creek, Forked River, New Jersey 08731
Safeguards
Group:
Type of Licencec:
Type of Inspection: Routine, unannounced
f.
- **
'
~
Dates of Inspection:
,
Mf.
Dates of Previous Inspectio ;
/)
[
/
[
, M At9
/ ~~! ~
Reporting Inspector:
1
/
Date
enman[Reac
'
r Inspector
E
G.
Accompanying Inspectors: No e
.
Date
'
.
,
Date
.
Date
Date
Other Accompanying Personnel:
None
Date
'
-
3
' ;
D. L. Caphtbn[ Senior fleactor Inspector
_
[ /k ~/I!
(78 4'
. / Da o
/
'
Reviewed P,y:
L
<
Reactor Operations Branch
V
$q
,
i
$
M
i1
14%
9604170308 960213
D
DEKOK95-258
)
-
.
- .
-
-
.-
-.
--
?10
g
-,
-
,
,
..
~'~'
<
(.j.
i.
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
,
Enforcemant' Action
A.
Violations
,
1.
Technical' Specification 3.3.C.1 - Failure to maintain average
rate of reactor coolant temperature change within 1000F during
,
a one hour period, during a cooldown- (Details 6.c)
2. ' Technical Specification 3.5.A.1 - Loss of primary containment
integrity due to:
..
klf .
a.
Butterfly isolation valve V-26-16 inoperability (JCP&L letter
to DL dated April 19, 1974, Subject: A0 74-25)
b.
Failure of a cleanup system DC isolation valve to close (JCP&L-
letter to DL dated October 11, 1974, Subj ect': A0 74-50)
3.
Technical Specification 2.3.3 - Failure of reactor high pressure
sensor RE03D to trip at a point corresponding to reactor pressure
less than or equal to 1060 psig (JCP&L letter to DL dated July 18,.
1974, Subject: A0 74-36)
N
4.
Technical Speciffcation 2.3.7 - Failure of low pressure main steam
line pressure switches to trip at less than required value during
surveillance tests.
RE23 A, B, C and D (JCP&L letter to DL dated July 19, 1974,-
a.
'
Subj ect: A0 74-37)
b.
RE23 C and D (JCP&L letter to DL dated July 26, 1974, subj ect:-
['
A0 74-41)
RE23 A, B, C and D (JCP&L letter to DL dated August 2,1974,
c.
Subject: A0 74-42)
d.
RE23 B (JCP&L letter to DL dated August 12, 1974, Subj ect:
A0 74-43)
RE23 A, B, C and D (JCP&L letter to DL dated August 19, 1974,
e.
Subject: A0 74-44)
S'
'
,
.
..
.
.
-
.-
-
.
-
- - -
_. .
.
-.
_~-
_. . - . . -
. - . _ .
-
.,
b'm
-. .
..
.
.
i
!
-2-
f.
RE23 A (JCP&L letter to DL dated October 4, 1974, Subject:
'
. .
A0 74-49)
w.:.
In
g.
RE23 B and C-(JCP&L letter to DL dated October 11, 1974,
- '
Subject: A0 74-51)
h.
RE23A (JCP&L letter to DL dated October 21,1974 Subject:
A0 74-52)
1.
RE23 A, B C and D (JCP&L letter to DL dated November 4,
1974, Subject: A0 74-56) (Details 8)
5.
Technical Specification 4.5.F.I.2 - Failure of MSIV NS 04B to close
'
within specified interval (JCP&L letter to DL dated July-23, 1974,
Subj ect: A0 74-38)
6.
Technical Specification 2.3.4 - Failure of electromatic relief
valve switches to trip within maximum allowable value during
surveillance (JCP&L letter to DL dated July 23, 1974, Subj ect:
A0 74-39)
7.
Technical Specf' :ation 3.5.B.1 - Failure to maintain secondary
containment integrity (JCP&L letter to DL dated November 18, 1974,
Subject: A0 74-58)
UI
B.
Safety Items
None
Licensee Action on Previously Identified Enforcement Items
1.
Failure to perform weekly checks of station and diesel generator
batteries.
r.
The licensee has implemented a surveillance test data sheet and ini-
tiated controls for routing of test records. Item is considered closed.
2.
Failure to notify the Director of the Regional Regulatory Operations
office within 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> followed by a 10 day report concerning abnormal
occurrences, within the required time frame.
The. licensee has re-establi.hed time intervals for review and re-
porting. No recurrence has occurred. This item is considered closed.
,
Design Changes
None reported-
s
0
-,
<
4
-
.
--
,
.'
-3-
"
Unusual Occurrences
.
\\
-
The following abnormal occurrences and events were reviewed. Comments
4
9;.;
concerning specific areas are noted within this report.
A.
Loss of primary containment integrity due to failure of torus vacuum
breaker valves V-26-15 and 16 to seat correctly.1
i
B.
Failure of emergency service water pump (520) to start when a normal
start was attempted.2
missiveposition.grayboosterpumppressureswitchRV40Dintheper-
'
Failure of core s
)
C.
-
.: a
'JCl
D.
Failure of one reactor high pressure sensof to trip at reactor
pressure < 1060 psig.4
""
E.
Four (4) of four main steam line low pressure switches tripped below
specified TS limits.5
l
F.
Main steam isolation valve NSO4B failed to close in less than ten
i
seconds.6
9.
Four (4) of five electromatic relief valve pressure switches tripped
in excess of TS limits.7
M
H.
Psilure of two shock and sway arrestors on the core spray system
and feedwater loop and disclosure of an additional leaking unit.8
I.
Two (2) of four main sta
.Lne low pressure switches tripped below-
specified TS values.9
)
'
J.
Four (4) of four main steam line low pressure switches tripped below
,
specified TS values.10
-
1 JCP&L report to RO:I dated April 10, 1974, Subj ect: A0 74-25
2 JCP&L report to RO:I dated April 12, 1974, Subj ect: A0 74-26
3 JCP&L report to RO:I dated May 22, 1974, Subject: A0 it-32
'
4 JCP&L report to RO:1 dated July 10, 1974, Subject: A0 .4-36
)
5 JCP&L report to RO:I dated July 12, 1974, Subj ec t: A0 74-37
j
6 JCP5L report to RO:1 dated July 16, 1974, Subject: A0 74-38
7 JCPEL report to RO:I dated July 16, 1974, Subject: A0 74-39
1
8 JCP&1. report to RO:I dated July 16, 1974, Subj ect: A0 74-40
'
9 JCP&I report to R0:I dated July 19, 1974, Subject: A0 74-41
10 JCPSL report to RO:I dated July 25, 1974, Subject: A0 74-42
y
,
e
.
.
. . .
.
. .
.
,
-
.
,
.
-4-
K.
One (1) of four main' steam line low pressure switches tripped below
specified TS values.ll
L.
Four (4) of four main steam line low pressure switches tripped below
n
specified TS values.12
- L. .b
'f
M.
Failure to follow MAPLHGR limits as submitted to DL on August 5, 1974.13
'
N.
Failure of one torus to drywell vacuum breaker to demonstrate opera-
bility.14
0.
Failure of two hydraulic shock and sway arrestors on core spray system
and identification of four additional snubbers previously unlocated.15
P.
Isolation condenser inoperability due to high flow as sensed by con-
densate line break sensors.16
Q.
One (1) of four main steam line low pressure switches trippel below
specified TS limits.17
R.
Failure of a cleanup system DC isolation valve to close electrically.18
S.
Two (2) of four main steam line low pressure switches tripped below
specified TS values.19
T.
One (1) of four main steam line low pressure switches tripped below
specified TS values.20
U.
Failure of a containment spray pump to start in the automatic mode.21
edE
V.
Four (4) of four main steam line low pressure switches tripped below
specified TS values.22
W.
Failure to maintain secondary containment integrity due to isolation
valve failure to fully close.23
X.
Diesel generator number 2 trip due to high temperature caused by louver
'
control temperature switch failure.24
11 JCP&L report to RO:I dated August 2,1974, Subject: A0 74-43
12 JCP&L report to RO:I dated August 9,1974 Subject: A0 74-44
13 JCP&L report to RO:I dated August 26, 1974, Subj ect: A0 74-45
14 JCP&L report to R0:1 dated August 27, 1974, Subj ect: A0 74-46
15 JCP&L report to RO:I. dated September 16, 1974, Subj ect: A0 74-47
16 JCP&L report to RO:I dated September 26, 1974, Subj ect : A0 74-48
17 JCP&L report to RO:I dated September 30, 1974, Subj ect: A0 74-49
18 JCP&L report to RO:I dated October 4,1974, subject: A0 74-50
19 JCP&L report to RO:I dated October 8,1974, Subject: A0 74-51
20 JCP&L report to RO:I dated October 15, 1974, Subject: A0 74-52
21 JCP&L report to RO:I dated October 21, 1974, Subject: A0 74-55
22 JCP&L report to R0:I dated October 29, 1974, Subj ect : A0 74-56
23 JCP&L report to RO:I dated November 11, 1974, subject: A0 74-58
,
24 JCP&L report to RO:I dated November 13, 1974, Subject: AQ 74-59
4
-
-
.
,
,
.
i
-5-
.
Other Significant Findings
,
,
.;[g
A.
Current Findinas
" t:
1.
Staffing
-
Shif t Supervisor complement was increased to five (5) effective
November 17, 1974 (Details 2.a)
[
,
I
2.
Chormate Water Removal Status
'
Approximately 1200 gallons of chroma:ed water remain in tank car
-
storage on site.
(Details 13.c)
.__
.
.
>
,
B.
Status of Previously Reported Unresolved Items
'
,
4
None Closed
,
Management Interview
An exit interview was conducted on November 22, 1974 with Mr. D. A. Ross,
Manager, Nuclear Generating Stations, Mr. J. T. Carroll, Station Superin-
tendent and Mr. J. E. Menning Staff Engineer. Inspection results were
discussed further with Mr. J. T.: Carroll on November 27 and December 9,
1974. Items discussed are summarized below:
j
gggg
A.
General
The inspector summarized the scope of the routinc inspection as reisted
to a review of abnormal occurrences, plant operations, selected re. actor
i
operating and surveillance records with respect to compliance with.
'
1
safety limits, limiting safety system settings, and limiting conditions.
.;
for operations.
Facility tour end discussions held with the reactor
'- {, .
operating staff were referenced.
B.
Staffing
The inspector stated that he considered the recent addition of a fifth
j
'
shif t supervisor to reflect favorably on overall station organization.
A licensee represent &tive stated it was the intent of JCP&L to main-
tain the shift complement on a permanent basis (Detail, 2a)
!
C.
Chromate Storage Status
'
)
.The inspector asked licensee representatives for a current status
-
,
report concerning processing of chromate water stored in tank cars on
site.
.
'
. ,;
e
)
'
.
- - .
- .
. .
. . .
.
. .
. .
.
-
. . _
.
_ _ , _ _ . _ . _ _ . _ . - _ . _ .
_._
~~
.-_ .
.
i
i
,
,
,
6-
-
A licensee representative stated that approximately 1,200 gallons
remained in tank car storage in addition- to water in permanent .
.
3 -
' tank storage still requiring processing. LA licensee representative
l
?![i,
further stated that tank trucks would be removed from the site.
.
!
Engineering support was referenced by the licensee as an example
~ "
related to resolution of this item.
(Details 13.c)
.
D.
Housekeeping
- The inspector stated that based on his tour of interior facility areas,
~
I
the repainting and refurbishment operations were successful and that
housekeeping was improved as a result.
Licensee representatives acknowledged the inspectors remarks.
(Details
13.b)~
,
.
E.
Adequacy of Plant Drawings and Records
The inspector stated that his review of A0 74-47, and discussions with
licensee representatives related to seismic shock suppressors indicsted
-
that problems existed with respect to plant drawings and descriptions.
The inspector further stated his position that engineering support
I
services should be committed to assure that as built drawings and records
are complete, up to date, and correct,
i
iNu(-
A licensee representative stated thac this area had been discussed by
the General Office Review Board (GORB), in connection with a GORB
action item.
The licensee representative further stated that a system
or mechanism to accomplish the above would be established on or about
January 1, 1975. The long term nature of this project and JCP&L Gener-
ation Engineering Department involvement was discussed (Details 10)
F.
Valve Tagging
$
The inspector stated that during conduct of a facility tour, tags were
noted, referring tn leaking packing dated April 1972, which involved
one mislabeled valve and which should have been removed prcviously,
by the licensee. The inspector noted that this matter was corrected
prior to the conclusion of the inspection and stated his position based
1'
on his sampling, that tagging operations should be audited, reviewed and
updated.
e
A licensee representative stated that new procedural coverage would be
'
implemented to alleviate the above concerns by January 1975.
(Details
,
13a)
L
,
,
d
-
e
1
- -
e
w
-
m
+w
c
-
l
'
.
~7-
G.
Personnel Exposure
The inspector stated that he had reviewed the licensee'a documentation
j)/c
related to one individual's recent exposure history and discussed the
){
ongoing investigation of the exposure with the licensee's consultant.
'*
The inspector stated that uncertainties precluded his acceptance of
1,781 mrem evaluation thus far documented by licensee, and referenced
his understanding based on discussions that the referenced employee
would be restricted from all radiation areas until the end of the
current quarter.
,
Licensee representatives concurred with the inspectors statements.
(Details 11)
. . .
H.
GORB Audit Results
The inspector stated that a review of documentation indicated that
results of 1974 GORB audits to date had not been furnished to the
site and discussed his concerns in this area.
A licensee representati7e concurred with the inspectors remarks.
(Details 2.c)
I.
Enforcement Action
4F'Mk
Items listed under enforcement action above were identified to the
licensee.
.
e
'
.
' >
.
,v
,
4
l
i
.
l
I
DETAILS
'"I
1.
Persons Contacted
Mr. D. A. Ross, Manager, Nuclear Generating Stations
Mr. J. T. Carroll, Station Superintendent
Mr. J. P. Maloney, Operations Supervisor
Mr. R. F. Swift, Maintenance Engineer
Mr. E. I. Riggle, Maintenance Supervisor
Mr. E. D. Skalsky, Radiation Protection Supervisor
Mr. J. L. Sullivan, Operations Engineer
Mr. J. E. Menning, Staff Engineer
..-
Mr. E. J. Growney, Technical Engineer
"
Mr. R. L. Stodnour, Staff Engineer
'
Mr. B. J. Cooper, Shift Foreman
Mr. H. Callahan, Control Room Operator
Mr. C. J. Silvers, Control Room Operator
Mr. K. Fickeissen, Technical Supervisor
Mr. T. Johnson, Electrical Foreman
Mr. C. McGee, Radiation Management Corporation
2.
Administration and Organization
dkUN
a.
Facility Staffing
The inspector was apprised that effective November 17, 1974
the Oyster Creek Shift Foreman complement had been increased
to five (5). An Operating Foreman was selected to fill this
position. No additional staffing changes were reported,
b.
Plant Operations Review Committee (PCRC) Meetings
,
The PORC met on the following dates and the minutes were
reviewed by the inspector. No deficiencies were identifed.
Date
Meeting No
April 30, 1974
34-74
May 2, 1974
35-74
May 3, 1974
36-74
May 6, 1974
37-74
May 7, 1974
38-74
May 9, 1974
39-74
-
,
,
e.
-
.
.
..
.
e
-
.
,
h<
4
-8-
Date
Meeting No
.
q,,.a
NWy 10, 1974
40-74
May 14-15, 1974
41-74
.;js{rj
-
Nky 16, 1974
42-74
May 17, 1974
43-74
May 20, 1974
44-74
May 22, 1974
45-74
May 23, 1974
46-74
May 24, 1974
47-74
.
May 28, 1974
48-74
May 30, 1974
49-74
June 2, 1974
50-74
June 6, 1974
51-74
...
iV '
June 8, 1974
52-74
t,;
June 12, 1974
53-74
June 13, 1974
54-74
'
June 24, 1974
55-74
June 26-28, 1974
56-74
July 9,1974
57-74
July 11, 1974
58-74
July 15, 1974
59-74
July 18, 1974
60-74
July 25, 1974
61-74
July 26, 1974
62-74
4NEU
August 2, 1974
63-74
August 8, 1974
64-74
';
August 14, 1974
65-74
August 20, 1974
66-74
August 29-30, 1974
67-74
September 20, 1974
69-74
September 23, 1974
70-74
September 24, 1974
71-74
September 25, 1974
72-74
.
October 2, 1974
73-74
October 9, 1974
74-74
October 9, 1974
75-74
October 10, 1974
76-74
October 16, 1974
77-74
October 18, 1974
78-74
c.
General Office Review Board (GORB)
Technical Specification 6.2.d.4 requires GORB to conduct per-
.
iodic audits of plant operations at least quarterly. The
,
4
.-.
___
.
.
-9-
inspector's review of the licensee's documentation indicated that
no records were available with respect to 1974 audits, to verify
,,y
Technical Specification compliance. Discussion indicated that
94.
no documentation had been provided to the site by GORB. Docu-
9
5
mentation regarding conduct of audits and timely issuance of same
to site management is unresolved.
3.
Operations
a.
Operational Status
t
The reactor was operating at approximately 1908 MW(t) - 664 MW(e)
at the time of this inspection. Representative stack gas and off
gas rates were 20,500 pei/see and 378,900 pei/sec respectively.
The facility had returned to power operation November 15, 1974
following a four day shutdown to effect repairs to a failed feed-
water bypass valve gasket and leaking valve packing on a recircu-
lation pump discharge valve.
b.
Unscheduled Shutdowns
Unscheduled shut downs occurred October 8 and November 11, 1974
as a result of increasing unidentified leakage in the drywell.
In both instances contributing leakage was related to a gasket
failure associated with V-2-36, a feedwater bypass valve.
In the
49%
latter shutdown the "C" recirculation discharga valve packing was
also leaking and required repair.
,
The inspector's review indicated the one inch feedwater bypass valve
repair was conducted utilizing an approved procedure and " freeze'
plug" technique. The affected valve utilizes a flexatalic gasket
in order to seal the bonnet to body joint. Repairs following the
October 8, 1974 shutdown included machining of 0.62 inches from
the bonnet tongue and flange and subsequent installation of a new
oversized gasket. Original dimensions were 2 7/16 inches OD X
'
1 7/8 inches 1D X 3/16 inches thick. Required dimensions were
2 11/32 inches OD X 1 7/8 inches ID X 1/8 inch thick. The in-
spector was apprised that lack of availability of a properly
sized gasket necessitated removal of 3/32 inch from the OD-
and 0.62 inches from the thickness.
Following installation a
hydro test was successfully performed.
Following the November
11, 1974 shutdown, the same valve gasket was found failed. A
gasket was procured with proper dimensions, the cut area on the
bonnet tongue was welded and machined. No distortion on the
valve body was detected and a hydro test was performed.
,
l
.
.
-10-
4.
Logs and Records
The following logs and records were reviewed without comment except
7,);
as noted elsewhere within this report
V,
Station Log Book - September 1 - November 19, 1974
a.
b.
Plant Operating Review Committee (PORC) meeting minutes (34-74
through 78-74)
Surveillance Records for the reactor coolant system for intervals as
c.
indicated within this report.
d.
All Abnormal Occurrences since the last routine inspection.
.f
Unscheduled shutdowns since the last inspection.
e.
5.
Facility
A.
Procedures
1
Severe Weather Conditions
Discussions with licensee representatives indicated that a formal-
ized procedure was not available delineating actions to be taken
g,y
or required inspections to be made in the event of severe winter
i
weather and icing conditions. A licensee representative stated
that this procedural coverage would be provided.
This item is
considered open.
6.
The following surveillance records were reviewed.
Idle Recirculation Loop Pump Start *
a.
The inspector reviewed multipoint recorder chart records on a
sampling basis for the period July 13 - October 16, 1974.
Li-
censee records indicated that the 48 point recorder monitoring 1000
temperatures was last calibrated September lo, 1974. Additionally
a system has been installed to differentiate between two (2) 24 point
banks. No violations of a 500 Technical Specification limit on pump
start were noted. The inspector observed that logging of pump start
sequences was not consistently performed. Problems in documenting
TS compliance were discussed at the exit interview. This item is
considered unresolved.
,
- RO Inspection Report 50-219/74-02, Details 5.b.(2)
,
- . - . - . - - . _ . - . -
- - . .
--
.
--
.
.. --
.
.
,
.
-11-
>
$ ~Heatup'and'Cooldown
,
)
i
The insoector audited temperature recorder chart records on a samp-
1
ling basis for the period July 13 - Octeber 16, 1974, recording re-
circulation' pump suction temperatures. Temperatures recorded over
i
h,
a one hour interval as measured on an average (not including peak
0
.O
and trough)- indicated a temperature change of. 550 F to 4400F, a
0
0
110 F change and 545 F to 425 F a 120 F change respectively for the
!
<
measured interval following a reactor scram on September 25, 1974.
- -
j
A licensee representative acknowledged the inspectors measurements.
The chart recorder permits selection of two of five recirculation
pumps fo- temperature readout. The licensees procedures do not re-
.
quire fo mal plotting of heat up and cooldown rates. The inspector
,
i
was subsequently informed that pressure relationship indicated a cool-
down of 1040F as measured by monitoring reactor pressure on the
.
wide range recorder whereas comparison of the saturatiorLtempera-
f,;
ture curve utilized by operators showed a 990F/hr cooldown for the
r.
referenced time interval.* Technical Specification 3.3.C.1 restricts
- .
the average rate of coolant temperature change to 100 F in any one
j
hour period. (Violation)
l
7.
Reactivity Control and Core Physics
MAPLHGR Limits
,
The inspector's review of A0 74-45, indicated that the licensee was
<
conducting formal training sessions. The inspector discussed timely
- M .
completion of lecture requirements with a cognizant licensee represent--
}.
ative. This item is considered open pending completion of the lecture
l
1
series.
8.
Protective Instrumentation
i
a .- Main Steam Line Low Pressure Switches
The inspector reviewed A0's 74-37, 41, 42, 43, 44, 49, 51, 52 and ~
2
,
56 related to setpoint drift. Review indicated that the frequency
W
of Abnormal Occurrences related to setpoint drift was indicative
.
- -
of insufficient tolerances in switch settings and the licensee's
self imposed and stepped up weekly surveillance frequency. The in-
l
spector was apprised that the licensees review committees had ap-
proved a TS change for submittal to DL concerning a reduction in
the 850 psig setpoint. The inspector was apprised that as of the
,
date of the TS change request approval surveillance intervals had
,
been reduced to prescribed TS requirements. This item is unresolved
i
pending the licensees resolution of recurrent setpoint drift
I
problems.
]
,
- telephone conversation, November 27, 1974
' . G
,
'si
,
<
-
,
,
-
-
i
.
.
.
. ~ , ., ..
.
.
-
.
- -
.. .
.
'
..-
,.
,
.
-12-
i
9.
Auxiliary Systems
.
-Isolation Condensers-
lW(gj l
- J
, ' Ej
The inspector reviewed A0 74-28.
The relationship of isolation con-
l
denser operations on recirculation flow and applicable plant proce-
j
dures is to be reviewed in the operator' training program. . This item
is considered open.
<
10.
Other Engineered Safeguards
,
Hydraulic Seismic Shock and Sway Arrestors (HSSA)
.
The inspector discussed A0 74-47 with cognizant licensee _repre-
'l
sentatives. The involved HSSA units were installed during con-
,
struction of Oyster Creek. According to licensee representatives
'
no shock and sway arrestors were installed after the originals.
'
Discussion and review indicated that the licensee was unaware-of
the piping in this area prior to locating the additional units. No
isometrics of piping located outside the drywell were available and
isometrics of the drywell piping were wrong. Adequacy of drawings
and records was discussed at the exit interview. This item is con-
sidered unresolved.
The licensees program to date, has included the rebuilding of HSSA
units with ethylene ' propylene seals. Experience has indicated that
certain kits'. were provided which contained millable gum poly-
urethane. Additionally, some units contained chevron type shaf t
piston packing and accumulator pistons not directly adaptable to
'
standard u-cup seals. Piston machining was required to facilitate
seal installation and resulted in seal fit which did not insure
1eak tightness.
Problems evident to date include maintenance
aspects, involving installation i.e. pinching of the numerous "0"
.
rings, burrs in the main piston rod, etc, which can result in
leakage, leaking alemite inserts, and assurance of proper seal
material. The licensee has verbally cautioned personnel con-
cerning burr removal and has implemented additional testing
,
following a 4,000 psi pressure test.
11.
Radiation Protection
Personnel Exposure *
The inspector reviewed exposure dat.a related to an individual.
- RO Inspection Report 50-219/74-17, Details 6.b
,
0
.
x_,
-
-- - -
_ _ .
.,
.--
-
-
.-
.
-
,
.
,
-
.
.
.
.
-13-
The' licensee had re-evaluaced exposure based on various RWP's
taking' credit for those employee activities such as break inter-
,
vals and tool procurement and recharging of dosimeters. The in-
1
jf/f;i
dividual was found to have been working additionally under an
-
RWP not previously accounted for by the licensee. The licensees
evaluation indicated a total exposure of 1781 mrem versua TLD
badge indications of 2990 mrem total body exposure.
An outside consultant was conducting an investigation of the
referenced exposure on November 21, 1974. Written evaluations
from the consultant were not completed at toe conclusion of the
inspection. Discussion indicated the following:
a.
No overexposed dosimeters were disclosed.
--
b.
No problems with TLD's were disclosed.
-
A probable assigned number of the magnitude of 1500 mrem or
c.
less would be recommended to the licensee.
d.
It was the consultants position that the individual could not
,
have received the exposure.
The inspector discussed the exposure with licensee representatives
and stated that uncertainties precluded justification for discount-
l
lis?
ing TLD exposure. This item was discussed at the exit interview.
12.
Radioactive Waste Systems
a.
Stack Gas Particulate Filter Analysis *
L
The licensee had modified procedural checkoff sheets and in-
corporated a delayed particulate spectrum count and a delayed
particulate gross count.
The inspector was informed by a
a
licensee representative that the procedure is undergoing
revision.
This item remains open for review during a sub-
sequent inspection.
13.
Miscellaneous
!
a.
Valve Tagging
The inspector reviewed tag status during conduct of a facility
tour. Tags were noted on valves V-15-34 and V-15-39 in the CRD
hydraulic system dated April 6,1972 identifying packing leakage.
No leakage was observed present. Subsequent investigation
I
.
,
- RO Inspection Report 50-219/74-13, Details 3a
I
,
.
-
.
.
,
O -
-14-
by the licensee disclosed that the system had been returned to
normal and packing leaks repaired.
The referenced tags should
have been placed on valves V-15-34 and V-15-35.
Tags were re-
-._
g*j["1
(j
moved prior to the completion of the inspection. This item was
discussed at the exit interview and is considered open,
b.
Housekeeping
The inspector during coaduct of a facility tour observed that
the licensee is completing repainting and refurbishment of the
facility. Housekeeping in interior areas was observed to be
generally good.
The inspector also observed control room
housekeeping. Problems with cigarette butts noted in a pre-
vious inspection * had been corrected.
Item is considered
~
closed. Overall improvements in facility appearance were dis-
,
cussed at the exit interview.
c.
Chromate Water Storage Status **
The licensee's processing of chromate water in tank car storage
was continuing.
The inspector was informed that about 1200
gallons remained in tank car storage. This water will be
drummed according to licensee representatives. Additional
water is still awaiting processing and is contained in per-
manent storage. The licensees plans include tank car clean
1%f
up and removal of cars from the facility site. This item was
discussed at the exit interview.
d.
Inlet Canal and Discharge Canal Temperatures following
November 11, 1974 Shutdown
Following the unscheduled shutdown occurring November 11, 1974,
a reconstruction of temperatures obtained from the licensee
indicated discharge canal temperatures measured at the U. S.
Route No. 9 bridge were 51 F at approximately the time of
reactor startup.
Bay temperatures were estimated to be 46-
490F during the shutdown. The licensee did not utilize dil-
ution pumps during the duration of the shutdown. No fishkills
were reported as a result of this shutdown.
- RO Inspection Report 50-219/74-03, Details 7
- RO Inspection Report 50-219/74-16, Details 3
,
e