IR 05000271/1989020
| ML19332E591 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Vermont Yankee File:NorthStar Vermont Yankee icon.png |
| Issue date: | 11/21/1989 |
| From: | Dexter T, Keimig R, Olsen W NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19332E590 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-271-89-20, NUDOCS 8912070418 | |
| Download: ML19332E591 (7) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:. - _ _ _ _. . __ _ .. _ - _ asnmKD Mt[
Qbsn.N gJgtLM b (un) - (acurJ.0) j jpgg tJ e a, 19 M t vacc 7..u m ) : (TM E) U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COPMISSION
REGION I
Report No - 50-271/89-20 f j Docket No.
50-271' O ' License No.
DPR-28, Licensee: Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corporation . RD 5, nox 169-i ' Ferry toad Brattleboro. Vermont 05301 , Facility Name: Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station j
Inspection At: Vernon, Vermont ' Inspection Conducted: September 25-29, 1989
Type of Inspection: Routine, Unannounced Physical Security l
Inspectors /#fN M / / [ ' W. T. Olsen, Reactor'Ingineer - / <date ~ Physical Security-W/Y/An -W / dl T. Dexter, Physical Security Inspector / da te' .; ' - Approved by' - //-J /- f9 R. R. KQ, ChipV, Safeguards Section - date ! Division of Radi#t' ion Safety and Safeguards
Inspection Summary: Routine, Unannounced Physical Security (Inspection-Report No. 50-271/89-20)- Areas Inspected: Management Sapport, Security Program Plans, and Audits; Protected and Vital Area Physical Barriers, Detection and Assessment Aids; a Protected and Vital Area Access Control of Personnel, Packages and Vehicles; Alarm Station and Communications; Power Supply; Testing, Maintenance and ' Compensatory Measures; and Security Training and Qualifications.
Results: The licensee was found.in noncompliance with the NRC-approved t Physical Security Plan in the area of Access Screening requirements. However, a Notice' of Violation is not being issued because the violation is of minor significance (Severity Level V), it was an isolated case and the licensee took
- '
inmediate corrective action. The inspectors also identified an unresolved - issue concerning 10 CFR 73.71, Reporting of Safeguards Events.
M20{gjf4[$[,f,
- Q
< _ -. . .. . _ .. . _ - _, _ _. _. _
' . . . . t -. _ ? ,
DETAILS
n ' 1.
Key Personnel Contacted
Licensee and Contractor Personnel , , p J. P. Pelletier, Plant Manager
- R. D. Pagodin, Technical Services Superintendent
> f J. B..Sinclair, Plant Services Supervisor
- R. B. Putnam, Access Control Coordinator
'
- C, B. Langmaid, Chief, Green Mountain Security Services (GMSS)
, .
- W. Jacobson, Assistant Chief, Operations (GMSS)
' . U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRCJ l '
- G. Grant, Senior Resident Inspector i
- Present at the exit interview.
' ' l 2.
Licensee Action on Previously Identified Items l' (Closed) Violation (50-271/89-08-01): Failure to lock a protected area
gate.
To prevent recurrence, the inspectors confirmed that the licensee l' has placed a locking device on the gate with a high security padlock and issued written instructions to the security organization on the intended i use of the lock.
,- l (Closed) Violation (50-271/89-01-02): Failure to provide adequate
protective area intrusion detection.
The inspectors determined, by observing tests conducted by the licensee's security supervisors, that the perimeter intrusion detection system is in compliance with the stated objectives in the security plan.
, (Closed) Violation (50-271/89-08-04): Failure to adequately secure a i vital area barrier.
The inspectors physically inspected the barrier and l determined that the vital area barrier was now properly secured.
3.
Management Support. Security Program Plans and Audits a.
Management Support.- Management support for the licensee's physical security program was determined to be acceptable by the inspectors.
This determination was based upon the inspector's reviews of various aspects of the licensee's program and the licensee's responsiveness to previous NRC-identified violations and concerns as documented in this report. During this inspection one non-cited violation, one unresolved item, and several additional potential weaknesses were identified.
The inspectors observed several aspects of the security program that contribute to the effectiveness of the security program; however, there continues to be potential weaknesses that still require management attention, k .. . -. _ .- .. - -- - .-
_ _ _--_... _ _ _ , > - . .
. . ...
.
l The following are examples of the positive aspects of the program: '
i . + e
- excellent safeguards Accountability and Control Program; l
.
- high morale in the security force; and
' J
- excellent rapport among the licensee plant personnel and
' the security force.
. ; ! F The following are examples of potential weaknesses: l 'I
- 1ack of timely repairs to security equipment, such as assessment and search equipment;
- incomplete medical records for security personnel; i
o '
- reliability of access control detection equipment, e
b.
Security program Plans and Procedures The inspectors reviewed the licensee's NRC-approved physical security plan (the Plan) and implementing procedures to ascertain whether the i Plan was accurate and whether the security procedures accurately and , adequately implemented the licensee's commitments in the Plan.
The inspectors found that Security Procedure SP0907. Compensatory and Reporting Requirements for Security Events, Revision 4. dated , . February 9,1989 had been revised recently and deleted the
, requirement to report several types of safeguards events that , previously were being submitted quarterly to the NRC in accordance with 10 CFR 73.71, Appendix G, ,
When questioned by the inspectors concerning this discrepency the licensee stated that the Security Manager, who was currently on , leave, had made the change and that the reason for the change could l not be explained by others on site. It appears that the Security
, l.
Supervisor overlooked the requirements of 10 CFR 73.71, Appendix G i l-and the guidance of Regulatory Guide 5.62, Revision 1, November 1987, l-Reporting of Safeguards Events, when revising the procedure.
The ' l' inspectors determined that this was an unresolved item which requires
further review.
The licensee agreed to have Security Procedure i SP0907 reviewed against the requirements of 10 CFR 73.71, Appendix G j l and Regulatory Guide 5.62 for compliance.
In addition, the licensee agreed to review the recordable events and submit those to the NRC that had been erroneously omitted from the previous quarterly log.
t l (UNR50-271/89-20-01) ' 4.
Protected and Vital Area Physical Barriers, Detection I and Assessment Aids ! a.
Protected Area Barriers - The inspectors conducted a physical f inspection of the protected area (PA) barriers on September 25, 1989.
j The physical barrier is maintained in accordance with the Plan.
However, the inspectors noted rust and corrosion in several locations ,
, , ,-,.r.- - w .-,.---%-. . -.v,_.-.- -- .w-- w.-. - - - - , -., -,,, -- -ri.+.
.. - - - - - -...... -.. - .- .- ! ' l - , j
4 i !
! ' on the PA barrier, that if lef t unattended could result in a degradation of the barrier. The licensee agreed to monitor this - condition and take action, as _ needed, to prevent any further barrier - degradation.
- b.- Protected Area Detection Aids - The inspectors requested the f licensee to conduct tests of the PA perimeter Intrusion ! Detection System (IDS) on September 25, 1989. One deficiency was ! identified.
TOS P/RGRAPil CONTAINS SAi'[Cll/SS E?.:.ET!M IS IS NOT FOR PiSllC DISCLOSEF,E, li IS lhT!hTIONAllY ' [[FTSLANK.
' No additional deficiencies were noted.
c.
Isolation Zones - The inspectors verified that isolation zones were well maintained and free of visual obstructions that could affect
assessment and response capabilities.
No deficiencies were noted, d, Protected Area and Isolation Zone Lichting - The inspectors conducted ! a lighting survey of the PA and 1 solation zones on L September 26, 1989. The inspectors determined, by observation, that lighting in both the PA and isolation zones was as connitted to in the Plan. No deficiencies were noted.
l e.
Assessment Aids - The inspectors observed the use of assessment aids, L and other security equipment in operation at the Central Alare ! L Station (CAS), during day and night hours, on September 26, 1989.
, ' During-the previous inspection, assessment aid deficiencies were , ioentified by the inspectors that resulted in a Level IV violation.
l The inspectors found that although several of the previously " identified deficiencies had been resolved, others still remained.
The licensee is continuing an investigation of the matter in an effort to effect permanent corrective action. Compensatory measures were still in effect. The previous violation (50-271/89-08-03) remains open.
5.
Protected Area. Access Control, and Vital Area Access Control of Personnel. Packages and Vehicles.
. a.
Access Control of Personnel - The inspectors determined that the licensee has a program to verify the trustworthiness and reliability of employees and contractor personnel granted unescorted access to I the PA and VAs. However, a sampling review of access authorization . . .
_ _ _. _ _.. .__ i i ' .. - I .
f ] ! recons revealed one case where an individual had been granted ( unescorted access to the PA and VAs in 1979, based upon a " good guy"
-letter from his employer with only one and one-half years of
continuous employment, contrary to the licensee's requirement for two j years of continuous employment. The licensee immediately withdrew l , t the indivioual's unescorted access authorization. The licensee's < Access Control Coordinator notified the contractor (who is the
, individual's father) and requested that the individual report the ! following morning to complete the required forms to begin a . ! , background investigation.
- The inspectors reviewed the Plan and found the following requirements.
TES PAP,AGRAPH CONTAINS SAFE 60ARDS l 1;ggmnilSt MD IS NOT FOR PISLIC ! DIStiOStifi, IT IS !!iTEWil0NAllY ' , LEFTBlkWK.
, , The inspectors detiermined that the licensee's failure to comply with commitments in the Plan is an apparent violation of NRC requirements, at Severity Level V.
However, due to the isolated nature of the ! ' problem and the immediate corrective actions taken by the licensee, and verified by the inspectors, the violation is not being cited and no response is required because the criteria specified in 10 CFR Part 2, Appendix C. Section V.A. of the NRC Enforcement Policy were , satisfied. NCV (50-271/89-20-02).
The inspectors also verified that the licensee has a search program, as committed to in the Plan, for firearms, explosives incendiary
o L devices and other unauthorized material. The inspectors observed ! h plant personnel and visitor access processing on several occasions
L during the inspection, and interviewed several members of the ' - security force regarding personnel access procedures.
THIS PAPJ.BRANI CONTAINS SAFE 6tlARDS li'F0iliMTITI MD IS NOT FOR PUBLIC DIS 0l0SlliE,11 IS INTEKil0NAllY LEFT BLANK.
. This matter will be reviewed during subsequent inspections.
(IFI 50-271/89-20-03) - - - . . .... - - - . _. _. _ _. _ -... _ _. _., _ _ _. __,__m._ ... _. _... _. _
... . . .. - -. . - -- . -.. - -. _ - - -. i - < .c . -
-
The inspectors reviewed the procedures for the contml of security locks and keys, and determined that they were consistent with coenitaents in the Plan. The inspectors also reviewed the PA, Access Control Area (ACA), and VA key inventory logs. No deficiencies were noted, b.
Access Control of Packages - The inspectors observed hand-carried packages being brought into the PA through the main gatehouse on. several occasions during the course of the inspection and interviewed selected security personnel on the search requirements for packages l entering the PA at this location. No deficiencies were noted.
i 6.
Alare Station and Communications ' The inspectors observed the operations of the Central Alarm Station (CAS)
and the Secondary Alarm Station (SAS) and determined that they were maintained and operated as committed to in the Plan. _CAS and SAS
- '
operators were interviewed by the inspectors and found to be knowledgeable of their duties and responsibilities. No deficiencies were noted.
7.
Testino. Maintenance and Compensatory Measures t l The inspectors reviewed testing and maintenance records and confirmed that . the records committed to in the Plan were on file and readily available for NRC review. _The station uses experienced Instrumentation and Controls _(14,C) technicians to perform corrective maintenance and to test security equipment. However, a review of repair records by the inspectors indicated that'some of the repairs were not being accomplished in a timely manner.
Some examples are: TMS PARAttM CONTAWS SAFEMAtt$ NHMMON AB 15 BT FOR PHLIC ! OlSCL0$ 2 E, if IS RT M IM ALLY IUT BLA K The licensee agreed to assess the corrective maintenance program for ways to improve the timeliness of repairs. This potential weakness will be reviewed during subsequent inspections. (IFI-89-20-04) , ' 8.
Security Trainina and Qualification The inspectors reviewed the initial qualification and annual requalift-
cation training records for the security force. No deficiencies were noted. However, a~ review of medical records for security officers revealed that although they contained the required certification by a licensed physician, several areas on the forms that were required to be - filled in, were not completed. None of the missing annotations were significant and it appeared to the inspectors that the members of the - - - - -..-.-.-.- . -. - - - -. - -.. - -
U:
- '
.. .., . - .
i '
, ' ! , security force had been adequately examined and found to be physically qualified in accordance with the NRC's requirements. The licensee agreed t to review all the medical records for completeness. This matter will be reviewed during a subsequent inspection.
(IFI-89-20-05)
9.
Exit Interview The inspectors met with the licensee representatives indicated in , paragraph I at the conclusion of the inspection on September 29, 1989. At -
that time, the purpose and scope of the inspection were reviewed and the
" findings were presented. The licensee's commitments, as documented in this report, were confirmed with the licensee.
{ At no time during this inspection was written material provided to the . licensee.
' i ! , ! , l ,- ' l l' t
. l l l- . - w -- , u. - - e .,wm n ,- ---.------,e
,-,,w-ue v -
e.-n - - e-e---- }}