ML18142A340
| ML18142A340 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Surry  |
| Issue date: | 03/12/1985 |
| From: | Walker R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | Stewart W VIRGINIA POWER (VIRGINIA ELECTRIC & POWER CO.) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8504150684 | |
| Download: ML18142A340 (3) | |
Text
e Virginia Electric and Power Company ATTN:
Mr. W. L. Stewart, Vice President Nuclear Operations P. 0. Box 26666 Richmond, VA 23261 Gentlemen:
SUBJECT:
EMERGENCY PLAN DEFICIENCIES - SURRY POWER STATION DOCKET NOS. 50-280 AND 50-281 We have completed the review of the Surry Emergency Plan (SEP) including revisions dated 4-30-84, 6-28-84, 7-19-84, 8-21-84, 9-11-84, 10-11-84, and the Corporate Emergency Response Pl an ( CERP) including revisions dated 8-20-83, 11-23-83, 2-24-84, 5-15-84, and 8-20-84.
Our reviews indicate that certain elements of your emergency response plans are not consistent with the provisions of 10 CFR 50.54(q), 10 CFR 50.47(b),
Appendix E to 10 CFR Part 50, and/or Sec;:tion II of NUREG-0654.
These defi-ciencies are delineated in the enclosure:
For each identified deficiency, you should either make appropriate corrections to the SEP and/or CERP, or respond with a written statement of why corrective action is not necessary.
We request that a response addressing each of the deficiencies identified in the enclosure be provided to us within 45 days of the date of this letter.
Should you have any questions concerning this letter, please contact us.
Enclosure:
Emergency Plan Deficiencies cc w/encl:
J. H. Ferguson, Chief Operating Officer W. S. Mistr, Manager - Security R. F. Saunders, Station Manag~r bee w/encl:
(See page 2)
~B~41-so6a4 sso:i12..
F ADDCK osooo2so PDR Sincerely, Roger D. Walker, Director Division of Reactor Projects
e Virginia Electric and Power Company 2
bee w/encl:
NRC Resident Inspector Document Control Desk Commonwealth of Virginia (t!fC *.
RllL RA!J,*;J)J5
@r;-h
- £WC1 i ne 2/ 7 /85 2/!1 /85 RII i.Q~I<...,,...
~2.S DCollins 2/ /)85
,i)~
7 Rii~
JPS ohr
.31 '/85 i
__ L_
RI/'
VBr~nlee
,_,5/85
\\..._,,
ENCLOSURE EMERGENCY PLAN DEFICIENCIES The following deficiencies have been identified in the Surry Power Station Emergency Plan (SEP) and the VEPCO Corporate Emergency Response Plan (CERP).
The referenced criteria are from Section II of NUREG-0654.
- 1.
- 2.
- 3.
- 4.
Criterion E.4. The report of an emergency to state and local governments (Form 6.6) does not include the following elements of Criterion E.4: b (date), d, e, f, g, h, i, j, and 1.
The report of radiological conditions to the state (Form 6.7) does not include the following elements of Criterion E.4: b (date), c, f, i (sectors), k, m, and n.
Form 6.6 contains blanks for recording the time and date of the declaration of the checked emergency classification and for recording the message-transmission sign-off time, but not the date.
This cou1d cause documentation problems in the event of an emergency which lasts more than 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />.
Even taken together, Forms 6.6 and 6.7 lack items b, f, and i as specified under Criterion E.4.
Criteria J.3 and J.4. The plan does not discuss provisions for radiological monitoring of all people evacuated from the site; apparently only individuals leaving the restricted control areas are required to monitor themselves for contamination.
Criterion J.7. The protective measures specified in SEP Section 6.4.3.2 do not correspond to EPA Protective Action Guides specified in EPA-520/
1-75-001.
The last paragraph of Section 6.4.3.2 states that 11The 10 mile EPZ may be returned to normal status when projected doses to the public are expected to be less than 2.0 Rem Whole Body, Less than 12 Rem Thyroid...
11 These threshold values (the same as the projected doses for triggering a General Emergency classification) are inappropriately high and produce a recovery methodology that is questionable.
Criterion L.1. The SEP does not identify backup medical facilities; it only indicates that the State, Health Department will provide a list of facilities that are available if needed.
A backup facility should be identified and appropriate support arrangements should be confirmed in a written agreement.