IR 05000244/1987028
| ML20196D256 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Ginna  |
| Issue date: | 01/25/1988 |
| From: | Keimig R, Madden T, Martin W NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20196D141 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-244-87-28, NUDOCS 8802170060 | |
| Download: ML20196D256 (6) | |
Text
,Fr/IE7DBY:j!33,,
['
'#M
~ f f? $ minC 22hihr~ c
(!w C)
(SIcudmT.
g _ _.. ;
$$*8$~&.c^1S'
c2-S'88
_
w :.c.= m n mm U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION I
Report No.
50-244/87-28 Docket No.
50-244 License No. DPR-18 Licensee:
Rochester Gas and Electric Corporation 49 East Avenue Rochester, New York 14649 Facility Name:
R. E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant Inspection At: Ontario, New York Inspection Conducted:
November 16 - 20, 1987 Date of Last Physical Security Inspection:
March 16-20, 1987 Type of Inspection:
Routine Unannounced Physical Security Inspection d
/M,79///
Inspectors:
_hysical Security Inspector
/ da{e W.' Martin, P
l0/
S)
I. Madden, Physical Security Inspector
' dste
.
.
Approved By:
^ ^ 7 A M #8
- R. R. Ke i mi g', - C h i t:T, S guards Section date Inspection Summary:
Routine Unann need Physical Security Inspection on
"
November 16-20, 1987 (Report No. 50-244/87-28)
Areas Inspected:
Plan and Implementing Procedures: Organization; Program Audits; Records and Reports; Testing and Maintenance; Locks, Keys, and Combinations; Physical Barriers - Protected Area; Power Supply; Physical
,
Barriers - Vital Areas; Lighting; Compensatory Measures; Assessment Aids; Access Control Personnel, Packages, and Vehicles; Detection Aids - Protected and Vital Areas; Alarm Stations; Communications; Training and Qualifications; and Contingency Plan Implementation.
Results: The licensee was in compliance with NRC requirements in the areas examined, h!k DO K Q
-
,
i DETAILS 1.
Key Persons Contacted a.
Licensee Personnel:
S. Spector - Superintendent, Ginna Production T. Powell - Manager, Security, Claims, and Insurance
,
W. Dillon - Director of Security
!
R. Woods - Supervisor, Nuclear Security
'
S. Schlegel - Nuclear Access Authorization Administrator M. Fowler - Coordinator of Nuclear Security Training T. Meyer - Superintendent, Ginna Support Services b.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Personnel:
N. Perry - Resident Inspector The inspectors also interviewed other licensee and contractor security
personnel.
2.
Security Plan and Implementing Procedures The inspectors met with licensee representatives and d*scussed the NRC-approved Physical Security Plan (the Plan).
As a result of these discussions, inspection, and a review of the Plan, ' vas determined that changes, to incorporate the revisions required wy t.a miscellaneous amendments codified by the NRC on August 4,1986, wer e sumitted as required and are currently under review.
All security personnel interviewed, both licensee and security contractor, demonstrated famfliarity with the Plan Implementing Procedures and NRC performance objectives.
3.
Security Organt.ation The inspectors reviewed the security organization and determined that all j
positions were filled and the organization was configured in conformance with the Plan,
,
i 4.
Security Program Audit The inspectors reviewed security program audit reports and verified that
'
the audits had been conducted in accordance with the Plan. The review included the response of the security organization to the audit findings and the corrective action taken to remedy any adverse findings. The documented corrective actions appeared appropriate for the findings,
- - - - - --
-, -
3x y
3 g
,
-
-
.
r
>
a
.
4 g
-
m.
.
,
.-
b.
I
'.3
__
',
~ ~
f
,.
~
_
_
10ne problem was identified by the in,spectors in that three audit proce-
~ dures permitted the auditors to fo, ego a physical audit of areas that had been found adequate during the previous andit, provided that a system modification had not been made since the previous audit. A minor lighting deficiency was noted by the inspectors that resulted from construction in a Projects' storage area and not from modification of the lighting system.
'
The licensee's recently completed audit had not physically audited light-ing but had commented that "The original design has not been altered and additional lighting has been installed-Onder trailers therefor (sic), the lighting is sufficient." The inspector.> pointed this out to the licensee
'
as an example of why this practice is unacceptable during the conduct of
'v an audit.
The licensee agreed to review the, audit procedures in questions
'
and t6 eliminate use of this practice.
'
6.
Records and Reports
' ~
,
'
The insoectors reviewed testing and maintenance records and records of securhy even~ts.
.
a.
Testing and Maintenance'Aecords:
--
'
,, c
.
y The testing and maOttenance records committed to in the Plan were on file and readfly aVailably for licensee review and NRC inspection.
'
b.
S u urity Event Reports:
The inspectors reviewed, and discussed with the licensee, all security events that had been reported to the NRC in accordance arth 10 CFR 73.71(c) since January 1,1987 No discrepancies were identified relative to reporting the events or the actions taken.
i 6.
Testing and Maintenance
,
The inspectors reviewed the testing and maintenance records and procedures for the intrusion detection' system, card readers, X-ray machines, metal detectors, explosives detectors, and assessment aids,
- Jo discrepancies were identified relative to either the records or
procedures.
_
7.
Lo[ks, Keys,andCombinations a
.
The in;cectors reviewed the installation, storage, rotatien, and
' appropriate records for all lacks, keys, and combinations and determined them to be as committed to by the Plan.
.,
8.
Physical Barriers - (Protected Area)
The inspectors conducted a physical walk-around in tection of the protected area barrier.
It was determined, by observation, that the
'
barriers w(re installed and maintained as described by the Plan.
,.
%
5
-
.
~
'
,
,
.
'
i
.
,
, - -,.
.
,_
. - -.
... -.
- -. - -
- -
- -.
-
.
--
-
-
2:.
f I
- 2 lI
9.
Physical Barriers - (Vital Areas) -
The inspectors observed vital area barriers and determined them to be installed and maintained as required by the Plan.
10.
Security System Power Supply The inspectors reviewed the security (JPS and determined that the system functioned and was tested and maintained as committed to by the Plan.
11.
Lighting i
The inspectors conducted a lighting survey of the entire protected area (PA) during the hours of 5:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. on November 18, 1987.
The inspectors were accompanied by a licensee representative.
The inspection
revealed one area apparently below the 0.2 foot-candle requirement.
The inspectors found that the area did r.ot degrade the security program _ since
,
it did not provide sufficient opportunity for a potential intruder to pose a threat to the plant or to any vital equipment.
The area around the small area in question was clear, well-illuminated and about 500 yards from the plant.
The licensee acknowledged this deficiency and had adequate lighting installed and in operation by 8:00 a.m. on
'
November 19, 1987.
12.
Comoensatory Measures The inspectors revievred the licensee's use of compensatory measures and determined that their use to be consistent with the ccmmitments in the Plan.
13. Assessment Aids
,
The inspectors observed the use of assessment sids in operation at both the CAS and SAS.
' I I~'L t
14. Access Control - Personnel, Packages, and Vehicles The inspectors reviewed the personnel, package, and vehicle access control procedures and, except as noted, determined them to be as stated in the Plan. This determination was made by observing personnel access process-ing during shif t change, visitor access processing, vehicle access j
)
__
.
.
'
g'
I i
processing, and a discussion with the licensee of package access
'
procedures.
,
i The inspectors determined that the licensee's method of processing hand-carried packages through the access portals provided the potential
-to introduce certain contraband into the protected area without detection.
'
Tills PARAGMP3 CONTAIMS SAFEGUAtiM INFORMAT!0N AND IS NOT FOR PUBLIC f!!SCLOSURE,II15 lN TENT!0NALLY LEFT SL ANX.
,
i The licensee stated that the matter would be reviewed.
15.
Detection Aids - Protected Area
.
The inspectors, by physically testing each zone of the protected area l
perimeter detection aids in the company of a licensee representative,
'
determined that they were installed, maintained, and operated as committed to in the Plan.
.
16. Detection Aids - Vital Areas The inspectors reviewed the installation and operation of approximately sixty percent of the vital area detection aids.
The inspectors observed physical tests of tamper circuits and alarms which the licensee condu:ted upon re%est of the inspectors. All circuits tested were in conformance to the commiteents in the Plan.
THis PAMGEPH CONTAINS SArEGUARDS INFDMI'On Ann 13 NOIFOR PUBLIC DISCl0SUSE. Il IS !NTE!!TIONALLY lEFI E!.;NK.
17. Alarm, Stations The inspectors observed the operation of both the CAS and SAS and found them to be operating as committed to in the Plan.
18.
Communications The inspectors observed tr;ts of all communication capabilities in both the CAS and the SAS. Also, the inspectors reviewed testing records for the various communication capabilities of the security force and found them to be as committed to by the Plan.
.
.
.
~.
'
]
.
6 l
19.
Training and Qualification - General Requirements The inspectors reviewed training, physical examination and testing,-and i
background investigation records for seven individuals.
These records included records for armed guards and supervisory personnel. All records i
reviewed were in conformance with the Plan.
The inspectors also observed
,
'
requalification training and determined that the training was being conducted as committed to in the Plan.
l 20.
Safeguards Contingency Plan Implementation Review
.i The inspectors ascertained that the licensee's program for responding to-
!
security threats and other contingencies, as outlined in the Plan, was l
'
adequate.
In addition, it was noted during the review of a selected sample of contingency event dri.lls conducted since April 1,1987, that the
'
l operations organization had participated in a significant number of the drills.
21.
Exit _ Interview i
The inspectors met with the licensee representatives listed in paragraph 1 at the conclusion of the inspection on November 20, 1987, At that time,
l the purpose and scope of the inspection were reviewed and the findings were presented.
At no time during this inspection was written material provided to the licensee by the inspectors.
,
i i
l
.
l l
--
---
. - -. -
...,,,--.,,-n-
,.-.
7y.,w g