ML18153B560

Responds to NRC 881129 Ltr Re Violations Noted in Insp Repts 50-280/88-42 & 50-281/88-42.Corrective Actions:Security Officer Posted at Exit Areas of Both Security Bldgs to Ensure Proper Response to Alarms from Portal Monitors

ML18153B560
Person / Time
Site:	Surry
Issue date:	12/29/1988
From:	Cartwright W VIRGINIA POWER (VIRGINIA ELECTRIC & POWER CO.)
To:	NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION & RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (ARM)
References
88-800, NUDOCS 8901040397
Download: ML18153B560 (3)

See also: IR 05000280/1988042

Text

• I * VIRGINIA ELECTRIC AND POWER COMPANY RICHMOND, VIRGINIA 23261 W. R. GAB.TWBIGHT

VICE PBBSIDBNT . December 29, 1988 * NUCLBAB U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission

Attn: Document_Control

Desk ~ashington, D. C. 20555 Gentlemen:

VIRGINIA ELECTRIC AND POWER COMPANY SURRY POWER STATION UNITS 1 AND 2 Serial No. NO/GDM:pmk

Docket Nos. License Nos. NRC INSPECTION

REPORT NOS. 50-280/88-42

AND 50-281/88-42 ,88-800 Rl 50-280 50-281 *nPR-32 DPR-37 We have reviewed your letter of November 29, 1988 in, reference

to the inspection

conducted

at Surry Power Station from October 11-14, 1988 and reported in Inspection

Report Nos. 50-280/88-42

and 50-281/88-42.

Our response to the violation

described

in the Notice of Violation

is provided *in the attachment . We have no objecti6n

to thi~ inspection

report being made a matter of public disclosure.

If you have any further *questions, please contact us. *w. R. Cartwright

Attachments

cc: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission.

Region II 101 Marietta Street, N.W. Suite 2900 Atlanta, GA *_30323 Mr. W. E. Ho 11 and NRC Senior Resident Inspector

Surry Power Station ---1

,. NRC COMMENT: . RESPONSE Tb THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION

REPORTED DURING THE. NRC INSPECTION

CONDUCTED

ON OCTOBER 11~14, 1988 INSPECTION

REPORT NOS. 50-280/88-42

AND 50-281/88-42

During the Nuclea.r Regulatory

Commission (NRC) inspection

conducted

on October 11-14, 1988, a violation

of NRC requirements

was identified.

In accordance

with the "General Statement

of Policy and Procedure

for NRC Enforcement

Actions, 11 10 CFR Part 2, Appendix C (1988), t~e violatio~

is listed below: Technical

Specification

6.4.D requires that radiation

control procedures

be followed.

• The 'Comp~ny Radiation

Protection

Plan, Chapter II,. Attachment

II-1, requires in item 2 that individuals

obey posted, verbal and written Health Physics (HP) instructions.

Health Physics Procedure;

HP-9.0.702, Calibration

and Operation

of Eberline Model PMC-4B/PMP-4C (portal radiation

monitor);

dated August 29, .1988i requires in Attachment

1, item 2.0 that, once an alarm has sounded, Health Physics is to be notified and the individual

causing the alirm is to remain in the area until released by HP,* HP Instructions

posted on the portal monitors at the exits in the security control points require, in item 5, that when a contamination

alarm sounds with a red * lamp: a. Confirm contamination

by using second monitor. b. If alarm sounds again, individual

is to remain in the area. c. Health Physics is to be notified.

Security General Order Number 24, Duties of Exit Control Officers, dated . March 28, 1988, requires in item 5.0, that the exit control officer notify HP if an individual

cannot clear the radiation

portal monitor and have the person standby ~or HP instructions.

• Contrary to the above, the requirement

to follow radiation

control procedures

was not met in that, during the weeks of September

12-16 and* 26-30, 1988, a total of thirteen people were noted exiting the site through alarming or non-functional

portal monitors and the individuals

were not stopped by security personnel

nor did they remain in .the area to await release by Health Physics. This is a* Severity Level IV violation (Supplement

IV). ----------...------------------------------------------. -*_

• RESPONSE TO NOTICE OF VIOLATION

INSPECTION

REPORT NOS. 50-280/88-42

AND 50-281/88~42

1. ADMISSION

OR DENIAL OF lHE ALLEGED VIOLATION:

The violation

is correct as stated. 2. REASON FOR THE VIOLATION:

The reason for the violation

is inappropriate

actions by personnel

in response to a malfunctioning

portal monitor alarm including

the use of an out-of-service

monitor. In addition, security personnel

were not appropriately

po~itioned

to observe the alarm status of the portal monitors or how exiting personnel

were using the portals. 3. CORRECTIVE

STEPS-WHICH

HAVE BEEN TAKEN AND THE RESULTS ACHIEVED:

A security officer has been posted at the exit areas of both security buildings

to ensure proper personnel

use of and response to alarms from the portal monitors.*

Audible and visual alarms have also.been

installed

within the main security building to alert Security when a portal monitor alarm has activated.

Additionally, the* electroni~

components

suspected -of causing spurious alarms and monitor malfunctjons

have been replaced.

4. CORRECTIVE

STEPS WHICH WILL BE TAKEN TO AVOID FURTHER VIOLATIONS:

As an additional

enhancement, out-of-service

portal monitors will be equipped with physical barriers to prevent their use by exiting personnel.

5. THE DATE WHEN FULL COMPLIANCE

WILL BE ACHIEVED:

Full compliance

was assured when a security officer was posted at each security-controlled

exit point on September

27, 1988. The additional

enhancement

noted in -item_ 4 above wil 1 be completed

by January 31, 1989.