ML20107C499

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Responds to Re Insp of Plant on 740606,07,17,22 & 0711.Three Discrepacies Should Be Resolved Prior to Placement of Insp Rept 50-219/74-12 in PDR
ML20107C499
Person / Time
Site: Oyster Creek
Issue date: 08/05/1974
From: Ross D
JERSEY CENTRAL POWER & LIGHT CO.
To: Robert Carlson
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
Shared Package
ML18039A986 List: ... further results
References
FOIA-95-258 NUDOCS 9604170386
Download: ML20107C499 (2)


Text

/

2 jersey central Power & Light Company MADISON AVENUE AT PUNCH BOWL ROAD

  • MORRISTOWN, N.J. 07960
  • 201-539411J f

f"

, Public Utilities Corporation o.nerni i

August 5,1974 i

Mr. Robert T. Carlson, Chief Facility Construction and Engineering Support Branch United States Atomic Energy Commission Directorate of Regulatory Operations Region 1 631 Park Avenue King of Prussia, Pennsylvania 19406

Dear Mr. Carlson:

Subject:

Oyster Creek Station Docket No. 50-219 RO Inspection Report No. 50-219/74-12 This letter is in reply to your letter of July 18, 1974 to Mr. Ivan R. Finfrock, Jr. regarding the inspection of Oyster Creek operations that was conducted by Mr. Walton of your office on June 6, 7, 17, 22 and July 11, 1974.

Prior to the placement of RO Inspection Report No. 50-219/74-12 in the Public Document Room, three discrepancies should be resolved. They are as follows:

1.

Details, paragraph 3 -

".02 gallons per minute" should be

" 02 gallons per hour."

2.

Details, paragraph 9 -- The initial hydrostatic test conducted on the two test mockups were conducted at different pressures, 1425 and 1280.

(Only one was tested to 1425.) Then, both mockups were heat cycled twice to 550"F - returning to ambient, at which time a second hydrostatic test was conducted at 1280 psi. Only one mockup was then cycled an additional eight times after which the 1280 psig hydrostatic test was again conducted.

3.

Details, paragraph 10 -- The tube expansion process was actually started at an elevation which would correspond to 151.25 inches above the bottom face of the housing flange and, consequently, is in reality 1 inch below the lowest design point of the partial penetration "J" groove weld.

I 9604170386 960213 PDR FOIA DEKOK95-258 PDR

^

,. *. ' e Mr. Carlson Page 2

'The resolution of these items is needed to prevent possible mis-interpretation on this subject should any further evaluations be performed.

Your cooperation is appreciated.

Very truly yours, 39.

~

Donald A. Ross Manager, Nuclear Generating Stations

~es 4

J

'f 4

4 i'

i f

a i