IR 05000266/1993017
| ML20059B810 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Point Beach  |
| Issue date: | 12/15/1993 |
| From: | Creed J, Madeda T NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20059B791 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-266-93-17, 50-301-93-17, NUDOCS 9401040252 | |
| Download: ML20059B810 (2) | |
Text
"
,
c m
'
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION III
Reports No. 50-266/93017(DRSS); 50-301/93017(DRSS)
Dockets No. 50-266; 50-301 Licenses No. DPR-24; DPR-27 Licensee: Wisconsin Electric Power Company
,
231 West Michigan
'
Milwaukee, WI 53201 Facility Name:
Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2
'
Inspection At:
Plant Site, Two Rivers, Wisconsin Inspection Dates: November 15-18, 1993 Date of Previous Physical Security Inspection:
February 8-12 and 22, 1993 Inspector:
90 *
" W 1 /e#
-
MM
'
Terfy J. Madeda U
Date
"
Physical Security inspector Approved By:
b A" d YIS b M
James'R. Creed, Chief l'
Date Safeguards & Incident Response Section i
Inspection Summary
'
Inspection on November 15-18. 1993 (Reports No. 50-266/93017(DRSS):
No. 50-301/93017(DRSS))
Areas Inspected:
Routine, announced physical security inspection involving:
,
Management Support, Security Program Plans and Audit; Protected and Vital Area Physical Barriers, Detection and Assessment Aids and Followup on Previous Inspection Findings.
Results: Two violations were identified. One violation was identified concerning failures to provide proper escort. This is considered to be a repeat violation, (reference Inspection Report No. 50-266/92017(DRSS);
'
50-301/92017[DRSS]). One licensee identified violation pertaining to a degraded protected area barrier was noted. This violation is not being cited i
because the criteria specified in Section VII.B of the General Statement of Policy and Procedures for NRC Enforcement Actions of the Enforcement Policy were satisfied. One Inspection Followup Item, regarding a procedure
,
'
deficiency in the site access authorization program was also identified.
Overall,_however, the security program was effective. Management attention and support for the program, security related modifications, and audit responsibilities were appropriately directed and usually resulted in effective implementation of day-to-day security requirements.
Inspection results showed 9401040252 931217 gDR ADOCK 05000266 PDR L
.
p
,-
-
\\
i
.
effective implementation in maintaining vital area barrier physical integrity, isolation zones and assessment aids.
Protected area barriers were generally
'
being maintained in an effective manner. Non-programmatic isolated weaknesses were identified regarding the degradation of one small portion of the protected area barrier, failure by a plant employee to provide a level of
. continuous escort and a procedure deficiency in the licensee's access authorization program. However, these inspection findings did not result in a
!
significant reduction in the total effectiveness of the licensee's security program.
!
i 2