ML20205H082
| ML20205H082 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Pilgrim |
| Issue date: | 03/24/1987 |
| From: | Martin T NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | Lydon J BOSTON EDISON CO. |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8703310618 | |
| Download: ML20205H082 (2) | |
See also: IR 05000293/1986044
Text
.
.
MAR 2 4 1987
Docket No. 50-293
Boston Edison Company M/C Nuclear
ATTN: Mr. James M. Lydon
Chief Operating Officer
800 Boylston Street
Boston, Massachusetts 02199
Gentlemen:
-
Subject:
Inspection No. 50-293/86-44
This refers to your letter dated February 28, 1987, in response to our letter
dated January 30, 1987.
Thank you for informing us of the corrective and preventive actions documented
in your letter. These actions will be examined during a future inspection of
your licensed program.
Your cooperation with us is appreciated.
Sincerely,
'
Original Signed BYU
M
mas T. Mar
, Director
vision of Radiation Safety
and Safeguards
cc:
L. Oxsen, Vice President, Nuclear Operations
A. E. Pedersen, Station Manager
Paul Levy, Chairman, Department of Public Utilities
Chairman, Board of Selectmen
Plymouth Civil Defense Director
-J. D. Keyes
The Honorable E. J. Markey
Senator Edward P. Kirby
The Honorable Peter V. Forman
Sharon Pollard
Public Document Room (PDR)
Local Public Document Room (LPDR)
Nuclear Safety Information Center (NSIC)
NRC Resident Inspector
Commonwealth of Massachusetts (2)
hh[3kDO
O
3
0
0FFICIAL RECORD COPY
RL BECO - 0001.0.0
03/17/87
i
l
i
.
.-
.
. _ -
.
.
_
, a
.
,
Boston Edison Company M/C Nuclear
2
!-
L
bcc:
Region I Docket Room (with concurrences)
!
Management Assistant, DRMA (w/o encl)
T. Murley, RI
Section Chief, DRP
W. Raymond, SRI, Vermont Yankee
T. Shediosky, SRI, Millstone 1&2
H. Eichenholz, SRI, Yankee
.P. Leech, LPM, NRR
PA0 (2) SALP oapara Only
Robert J. Bores, DRSS
i ~
~
,
i
!
!
,
i
RI:DRSS
RI:DRSS
I:DRSS
Nimitz/emw
Shanbaky,
Bellamy
A.5
M5
l'
03/yJ/87
03/1V/87
03/2 //87
'
.
OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
RL BECO - 0002.0.0
03/17/87
l
i
-_ __ . _ _ _ _ ,_ .. _ _ ._._.,_.___ _ .__ _ ._.,_.. - _ _.__._._..__ _.- . _ _ _ ._. _ ..__ _ _.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
-
..
h
nosnweason
Executive Offices
800 Boylston street
Boston, Massachusetts 02199
Ralph G. Bird
Senior Vice Presider 4 - Nuclear
February 2& 1987
BECo Ltr. #87-040
>
'
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Attention: Document Control Desk
Washington, DC 20555
Mr. Thomas T. Martin, Director
Division of Radiation Safety
and Safeguards
631 Park Avenue
King of Prussia, PA 19406
License No. DPR-35
Docket No. 50-293
Subject: Response to NRC Inspection Report No. 50-293/86-44
Dear Mr. Martin:
Attached please find Boston Edison Company's response to the Notice of
Violation as identified in Appendix A of NRC Inspection Report 50-293/86-44
9
dated January 30, 1987.
Please do not hesitate to contact me directly should you have any questions
regarding this matter.
Very truly yours,
Ex L
Ralph Bird
EM/la
Attachment:
1.
Boston Edison Company Response to Notice of Violation
xc:
Dr. M. McBride
I
f
4
-
.
. _ .
-
.
ATTACHMENT 1
-
-
BOSTON EDISON COMPANY RESPONSE TO NOTICE OF VIOLATION
Boston Edison Company
License No. DPR-35
Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station
Docket No. 50-293
Technical Specification 6.11, requires that procedures for personal radiation
protection be prcpared and adhered to.
Procedure 6.1-211, Radiological
Release of Vehicles / Material to Offsite, Revision 0, requires, in part, in
Section II.B that all items leaving the site be cleared by a quallfled member
of the Radiological Section prior to being allowed through the Security Fence.
Contrary to the above, on November 25, 1986 and December 6, 1986, a concrete
truck and laundry truck, respectively, were allowed through the Security Fence
and subsequently left the site without being cleared by a member of the
Radiological Section.
Boston Edison Response
Boston Edison concurs with the facts stated in the notide of violation.
On November 25, 1986, a concrete truck was released from site without being
cleared by a member of the Radiological Section.
Immediate action was taken
to regain control of the vehicle.
Appropriate radiological surveys of the
truck's path were performed and the t:1ck was surveyed at its destination.
Radiological clearance was granted since no contamination was detected.
Corrective actions taken to preclude reoccurrence of this event were;
(1) Security Procedure 2.01 " Station Access Control" was strengthened to more
clearly state the required radiological requirements to be met prior to
_
vehicle release from site.
This revision was approved on December 3, 1986.
(2) Supplemental training of the security force in Vehicle Egress Control was
started on November 26, 1986 and completed by appropri, ate security
personnel on January 15, 1987.
(3) The requirement for Security Supervisor approval before vehicles and
materials are allowed to exit the site was instituted.
It was believed that these corrective steps were sufficient to avoid further
violations of this type.
-
On December 6, 1986 a laundry truck left the site without prior clearance from
the Radiological Section.
The laundry truck was immediately returned to the
site and proper radiological clearance was granted. Appropriate radiological
surveys were performed and no contamination was detected.
The following
extenuating circumstances were considered in the evaluation of the previously
implemented corrective actions:
,,
(1) The laundry truck was within a narrow roadway which leads to the vehicle
exit portal.
Behind the truck was another vehicle.
The roadway is
bordered by a building on one side and the switchyard fence on the other,
permitting only one way travel on this portion of roadway.
Page 1 of 2
.
.
-'
'
ATTACHMENT 1 (cont.)
BOSTON EDISON COMPANY RESPONSE TO VIOLATION
(2) While the vehicles were awaiting exit processing by security and
radiological protection personnel, an ambulance arrived at the vehicle
gate in response to an emergency within the protected area.
It was
security's understanding that the emergency involved a life threatening
situation.
The security escort with the laundry truck retrieved that
vehicle driver's security credentials and instructed the driver to move
forward and stop just outside the vehicle gate and to wait until the
emergency was terminated. The decision to move the truck forward was
proper since it expedited the entrance of the emergency vehicle on site.
Contrary to the direction of the security escort, the laundry truck driver
drove away.
Security force personnel tried to have the vehicle stopped
prior to leaving the controlled area, but it is a very sh' ort distance to
the public roadway and it was not possible to intercept the vehicle.
(3) Security force personnel at the vehicle gate were_ experienced and well
aware that the vehicle required radiological clearance.
The vehicle
driver had been to the site many times and knew that the vehicle required
radiological clearance; he either did not understand or chose to ignore
the directions from security. A different company is now providing
laundry service.
'
(4) It was acceptable practice at the time to allow an escorted vehicle to be
followed by a security force member in a site security vehicle.
The following additional corrective action has been taken to avoid further
violations:
.
(1) The practice of allowing site security escorts to follow escorted vehicles
with security vehicles was immediately stopped.
Escorts are now directed
to be inside or on foot alongside the escorted vehicle with the driver,
enhancing control over the vehicle operator.-
The results achieved by the aforementioned improvements in vehicle egress
processing have been effective in that no further violations of this type have
been experienced.
Full compliance was achieved on December 6, 1986, the date the laundry truck
was returned to site and appropriate radiological clearance obtained.
!
i
'
.
I
1
Page 2 of 2
-_ _
. . _ _ . _ _ . . . . _
. _ _
,_,__ __ _ ___ _ _,__. , __ _____-._________.____._._ _ ______. ,,,__,_ _ ___,