IR 05000247/1982016
| ML20028B686 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Indian Point  |
| Issue date: | 11/19/1982 |
| From: | Bailey R, Gody A, Madden W NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20028B681 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-247-82-16, NUDOCS 8212030147 | |
| Download: ML20028B686 (7) | |
Text
..
.
,. k.
.
U. S. NllCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION I
Report No. 50-247/82-16 Docket No. 50-247 License No.
DPR-26 Safeguards Group IV Licensee: Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc.
-'
4 Irving Place New York, New York 10003
'
Facility Name: Indian Point Nuclear Generating Station, Unit 2 Inspection At: Buchanan, New York
-
Inspection Conducted:
July 26-30, 1982 Date of Last Physical Protection Inspection: April 26-30, 1982 Type of Inspectio. R utine, JJnannourgS Physical Protection Inspectors:
_
y (_
// /4 M Lg
,
ailey, P'y 'c Prot
~ ion
' date/
.
In ector ll 12.
(' -
3c adden,/ sical P tection
/ date
,
,
Inspecto Approved by:
g+yt_Lo /
/W
/ 9 /82-
/A.
. Gody, Chief, fafegulrds and
/ date Fu Facilities Sc4 tion, Nuclear aterials and Safeguard Branch Inspection Summary:
Routine, Unannounced Physical Protection Inspection on July 26-30, 1982 (Report No. 50-247/82-16).
Areas Inspected:
Security Plan and Implementing Procedures; Testing and Maintenance; Physical Barriers (Protected Area); Physical Barriers (Vital Areas); Lighting; Access Control (Personnel); Access Control (Vehicles);
Access Control (Packages); Detection Aids (Protected Area); Detection Aids (Vital Areas); Alarm Stations; Communications; Training and Qualification Program; Security Contingency Plan and Independent Inspection Effort (Compensatory Security Measures).
The inspection began dur,ing the day shift and involved 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> onsite by two NRC Region-based inspectors.
Two inspec-tor hours were accomplished during other than day shift hours.
Results: The licensee was in compliance with NRC requirements in 12 of the 15 areas inspected.
Three violations were noted:
Failure to meet testing 8212030147 821119 PDR ADOCK 05000247 O
.
...
,
e
.
4'.
A p
1 l
.
-requirements for special purpose detectors; Failure to maintain a arm on a
-
'
gate in conformance with the Security Plan; Failure to meet Security Plan
'
requirements for continuous communications capability with alarm stations.
One unresolved item was noted:
Failure to protect certain areas in accordance
,
with the Physical Security Plan.
- i
..
1 i
.
.
i
.
i
4
.,
,. -. _. _,. _ _
.._,___,_.__m___.-
_.
__- --__
-.
_ _,. _ _.
_.., _..,, _,,.. - _
,.-
-
,.
j e
c
.. - - -.
.
J DETAILS
-
.
1.
Key Personnel Contacted Consolidated Edison Company
- C. W. Jackson, Vice President, Nuclear Power
- J. Basile, General Manager, Nuclear Power
- J. M. Bahr, Regulatory Affairs K. Burke, Regulatory Affairs
- R. D. Grassberg, Division of EngineeYing
- P. Szabadas, Division of Engineering
- B. Shepard, Field Engineering
- L. Kominiak, Division of Engineering
- L. J. Kawula, Acting General Manager Administration Services
- M. Skotzko, Security Supervisor
USNRC Senior Resident
- T. Rebelowski The inspectors also interviewed other licensee personnel and members of the Pinkerton Security Service contract guard force.
- denotes those present at the exit interview.
2.
30703 - Exit Interview The inspectors met with those licensee representatives denoted in para-graph 1 at the conclusion of the inspection on July 30, 1982. At that time the inspectors summarized the purpose and scope of the inspection and informed those present of the findings.
3.
92701 - Unresolved Items Unresolved items are matters about which more information is required in order to ascertain whether they are violations or deviations. An unre-solved item disclosed during the inspection is discussed in Paragraph 8.
4.
92713 - Independent Inspection Effort (SGI)
-
-,
-
_..
.-
.
-
c.
.
.s
.
5.
81118 - Security Plan and Implementing Procedures
_.
(SGI)
..
6.
81142 - Testing and Maintenance
,
(SGI)
-
l 7.
81152 - Physical Barriers (Protected Area)
No violations were noted. The licensee had installed and maintained the physical barriers surrounding the protected area in conformance with the Physical Security Plan and regulatory requirements.
8.
81154 - Physical Barriers (Vital Areas)
(SGI)
.
g
%
a g-4 e
(SGI)
.
e 8
.
O J
?
r
,
..
.
....,.
-
9.
81162 - Lighting
.
(SGI)
,
-
10. 81170 - Access Control (Personnel)
No violations were noted. The licensee controlled access to protected and vital areas (exclusive of areas listed in paragraph 8), in confor-mance with the Physical Security Plan.
Personnel entering the protected area were searched for firearms, explosives, and incendiary devices.
Search equipment was adequate and appropriate for the intended function.
11. 81172 - Access Control (Packages)
No violations were noted. The licensee controlled the entry and exit of packages and material to the protected area and searched them for contra-band in accordance with the Physical Security Plan.
The search equipment was adequate and appropriate for the intended function.
12. 81174 - Access Control (Vehicles)
No violations were noted. The licensee controlled access of vehicles to the protected and vital areas in conformance with the Physical Security Plan. Vehicles entering the protected area were properly searched and escorted.
13. 81178 - Detection Aids (Protected Area)
No violations were noted.
The security intrusion alarm system detected penetration tests of the protected area and isolation zones, as required by the Security Plan.
14. 81180 - Detection Aids (Vital Areas)
_
(SGI)
.
o
,
,,
.
.. -..,
.
_
,
(SGI)
'
15. 81184 - Alarm Stations
)
No violations were noted. The onsite central and secondary alarm t
stations (CAS/SAS) established by the licensee were maintained in confor-
.
'
mance with Security Plan requirements.
,q
.
<
16. 81188 - Communications
.-
i One violation was noted.
During an accompanied tour of the Secondary Alarm Station (SAS) on July 29, 1982, the inspector observed that three security force members on duty throughout the site did not have the
~
capability for continuous communication with both the cent'ral'and secon-dary alarm stations. One security force member had no port'ble radio a
transceiver and no other means of communications readily available and the other two had radio transceivers that were inoperable (alleged dead batteries).
Paragraph 3.2.1.6 of the Security Plan requires security personnel to have the capability for continuous communication with the Central and Secondary Alarm Stations. The licensee's failure to equip all on-duty security personnel with a means for continuous' communication with the on site alarm stations is a violation (50/247/82-16-05).
81501-TrainingandQualificatio$ Program 17.
No violations were noted. The lic2nsee was following the designated implementation schedule.
Program completion is expected by December 1, 1982.
i
18. 81601 - Safeguards Contingency Plan \\~
\\
No violations were noted. The licensee's responses by the security organization to security threats and other contingencies were consistent with responses detailed in the approved security and contingency proce-
.
dures.
)
I
,
-
l
.
,
,
'
<
4
'
-
1 1
.
'!
i