IR 05000271/1990004
| ML20043G092 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Vermont Yankee File:NorthStar Vermont Yankee icon.png |
| Issue date: | 06/12/1990 |
| From: | Albert R, Keimig R, Lancaster W NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20043G089 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-271-90-04, 50-271-90-4, NUDOCS 9006190043 | |
| Download: ML20043G092 (8) | |
Text
,
?Nrainar; m,u.
,
,
,
,
,
ll J O N e w d L.._.plcc(d,EJ
<,
'
fC:9
-"
. M O A W N E._ _ _ _ f.:r:/.e-99 ~ ~ ~ -
u
>
(cr.c% : mw; w-,~
.
cw.
U. S. NUCLEAR. REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION I
Report No.
50-271/90-04 Docket No.
50-271 License No.
OPR-28 Licensee:
Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corporation RD 5, Box 169 Ferry Road Brattleboro,-Vermont 05301 Facility Name:
Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station
{
Inspection At:
Vernon, Vermont Inspection Conducted: May 21-25, 1990 Type of Inspection:
Routine, Unannounced Physical Security.
i i
Inspectors:. N.
W CA.A O
.
W. K. Lancaster, Physical Security inspector
' date 0 [0 - ll $ 0 9%
e
~
'
,
.R. J NAlbert bysical Security Inspector date 1 -
Approved by:
J
)1
?0
,
1. R. Keimig, Chief,' Safeguards Section
/ datd Livision of Radiation Safety and. Safeguards Inspection Summary:
Routine, Unannounced Physical Security (Inspection Report No. 50-271/90-04)
Areas Inspected: Management Support, Security Program Plans, and Audits; Protected and Vital Area Physical Barriers, Oetection and Assessment Aids; i
Protected and Vital Area Access Control of Personnel, Packages and Vehicles
-
Alarm Station and Communications; Testing, Maintenance and Compensatory Measures; Security Training and Qualifications; and Land Vehicle Bomb Threat Contingency-Procedures Verification.
Results: The licensee was in compliance with NRC requirements in the areas-
- inspected.
i l
jjf[' TkO h b
.
o
.
i
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
DETAILS
.
'
1.
Key Personnel Contacted Licensee and Contractor Personnel i
- D. A. Reid, Plant Manager
!
- R. N. Pagodin, Technical Services Superintendent'
'M.-T. Varno, Plant Services Supervisor
- J. M.-Mortatry, Security Supervisor
- R. B.-Putnam, Access Control Coordinator
- J. C. Kinsey, Project Engineer
- R. P. Grippardi, Quality Assurance Supervisor
- C B. Langmaid, Chief, Green Mountain Security Services (GMSS)
- W. Jacobson, Assistant Chief, Operations (GMSS)-
U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)
- H. Eichenholz, Senior Resident Inspector
- present-at the exit interview 2.
NRC Onsite Follow-up of Previously Identified Items a.
(Closed) Unresolved Item (50-271/89-20-01):
Failure to have all regulatory required safeguards events identified in a recently revised security procedure that was used as guidance for reporting safeguards
events.
The inspectors verified that the licensee revised security procedure No. SP0907 to fully implement the requirements of 10 CFR'
73~71, Appendix G and Regulatory Guide 5.6.2.
The inspectors also reviewed the licensee's security event logs for. the last quarter of 1989 and the first quarter of 1990.
b.
(Closed) Inspector Follow-up Item (50-271/89-20-03):
Failure of search equipment to pass a functional test.
The inspectors verified that all search equipment passed functional tests during this inspection, c.
(Closed) Unresolved Item (50-271/89-08-06):
Failure to conduct adequate searches of material and packages entering the protected area (PA) at the plant's main warehouse.
The inspectors verified that the licensee assessed the search program at the warehouse and took corrective actions to improve the search program, at this location.
The inspectors reviewed plant procedure No. AP0801 and observed searches at this location.
d.
(0 pen) Violation (50-271/89-08-03):
Failure to provide adequate assessment aids to assess PA intrusion detection system (IDS) alarms.
The licensee is in the process of upgrading assessment aid _ _ _ - _ _ _
- - - -
--_ _ ___ -
___ _ _ ___
_ ----
_
.
.
'
-
.
[
-l Tills PAMMAPP. 00HAINS SAFEELM IMMIEil Ai913 iGT F0ft F15Ll0 MSCLOSU!!!, IT IS li!T3ITIDMLLY LEFT BLANK.
I This item will remain open until the NRC can assess the
!
effectiveness of the licensee's actions to upgrade assessment
_
'
aids.
e.
(Closed) Inspector Follow-up Item (50-271/89-20-05): Medical records-for security force members (SFMs) were found to be incomplete.
The inspectors verified that the licensee conducted a review of all SFM medical records for completeness. As a result of this review, the'
licensee initiated several enhancements for all SFM records.
f.
-(Open) Inspector Follow-up Item (50-271/89-20-04): Plant repair records indicated that some repairs to security equipment and systems were not being accomplished in a timely manner.
The inspectors verified that the licensee was in the process of establishing a prioritization program for security equipment repairs.
This item will remain open until the NRC can assess the effectiveness of the licensee's actions to accomplish repairs to security equipment and systems in a timely manner.
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 _
i
-
to previous NRC-identified items and minor concerns identified during-this inspection, i
Since the last NRC routine physical security inspection (Inspection No. 50-271/89-20) was conducted on September 25-29, 1989, the licensee has established a security enhancement program to address security weaknesses at the plant.
The licensee's security enhancement program
~
addresses both long and short term corrective actions to enhance the effectiveness of the existing-program.
The following are the areas of the licensee's security program that are being evaluated:
'
.
_. _ _
m
,
,
v
.
.
THIS P8WEl 00i! tai!!S SAFEEL:AEi IEEliGN A!!D IS IGT FOR PEl0 Listi.022, IT IS IXi3Il0MLLY i
i!FT E!El In summary, management attention to and support of the nuclear security.
-program appears to have increased since the last. inspection.
Based
~
,
upon the inspectors' reviews of the licensee's security program ar.d
the efforts being made to upgrade and enhance it, the inspectors t
determined that the program is receiving appropriate management i
attentlon and support.
-t b.
Security Program Plans - The inspectors verified that changes to-the licensee's Security, Contingency, and Guard Trairing and qualification Plans, as implemented, do not decrease the effectiveness of the respective plans, and were submitted in accordance with NRC requirements.
-No discrepancies were noted, c.
Audits
.The inspectors reviewed the 1990 atinual security program
+
audit, conducted by the Quality Assurance (QA) corporate staff.
The
..._
inspectors noted that the audit was very-comprehensive and thorough.
- '
Several findings, discrepancies, concerns and recommendations were made in the audit report.
The depth and thoroughness of the audit-ano the security expertise possessed by the ' auditors appeared adequate.
Weaknesses in the licensee's annual security program audit that were identified in NRC Inspection Report No. 50-271/89-08 had been corrected.
,
No deficiencies were noted.
4.0 Protected Area Physical Barriera, Detection and Assessment Aids a.
-Protected Area Barriers - The inspectors conducted a physical inspection of the PA barrier on May 23, 1990. No deficiencies were
>
noted.
.
b.
Protected Area De_tection Aids - The inspectors observed the licensee conduct tests of the PA IDS on May 23, 1990. No deficiencies were l
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.
l l
l
"
,
..
Eh.
-
-
.
<
,
.
.
..
1 d.
Protected Area and Isolation Zone Lighting - The inspectors conducted a lighting survey of the PA and isolation zones on May 22, 1990. The j
inspectors determined, by observation, the lighting in both the PA
!
and isolation zones'was as committed to in the NRC-approved security i
plan (the Plan).
No deficiencies were noted.
l l'
e.
Assessment Aids
_The inspectors observed the use of assessment aids j
and other security equipment in operation at the Central Alarm Station
(CAS), during day and night hours, on May 22, 1990. Corrective actions _
.!
as identified in Section 2.d of this inspection report detail licensee actions to upgrade PA assessment aids.
Compensatory measures were still in.effect for assessment deficiencies.
The licensee's efforts
to upgrade PA assessment aids will be reviewed during subsequent i
f inspecticas, 5.0~ Protected and Vital Area Access Control of Personnel, Packages and Vehicles
]
l a.
Personnel Access Control - The inspectors determined that the licensee i
was exercising positive control over personnel access to the PA and
,
Vital Areas (VA). This determination was based on the following:
!
d (1) The inspectors _ verified that personnel are properly identified
!
and: authorization is checked prior to issuance of badges and l
key-cards.
No discrepancies were noted.
[
!
(2) The inspectors verified that the licensee has a program to
[
confirm the trustwocthiness and aliability of employees and
]
_
contractor personn':1. No discrepancies were noted.
'
(3) The inspectors ve'ified that licensee takes precautions to_ ensure l
that an unauthori:ed name cannot be added to the access list by
. :
']
having a member o! management review the list every 31 days. No discrepancies wert noted.
-(4) The inspectors.ve ified that the licensee has a saarch program, as committed to in the Plan, for firearms, explosi nes, incendiary devices and other unauthorized materials.
The inspectors observed personnel-access processing, during shift changes, and visitor access processing.
The inspectors also interviewed members of s
the security. force and licensee's security stof f about personnel
access procedures.
No discrepancies were noted.
(5) The inspectors determined, by observation, that individuals in I
the PA and VAs display their access badges as required.
No discrepancies were noted.
(6) The inspectors verifled that the licensee has escort procedures for visitors in the PA and VAs.
No discrepancies were noted.
l-
!
L i
,
i:
.
--
,,..,
li s -
,
(7) The inspectors verified that the licensee has a mechanism for expediting access to vital equipment during emergencies and that the mechanism is adequate for its purpcse. No discrepancies were noted.
(8) The inspectors verified that unescorted access-to VAs is limited to authorized individuals.
The access list is revalidate'd at least once every 31 days as committed to in the Plan. No discrepancies were noted, b.
package and Material Access Control - The inspectors determined that the ficensee was exercising positive cor.rol over packages and material that are brought into the PA at the main access portal.
The ' inspectors reviewed the package and material control procedures and found that.they were consistent with commitments in the Plan.
The inspectors also observed package and material processing and interviewed members of the security force and the licensee's security staff about package and material control procedures.
No discrepancies were noted, c.
Vehicle Access' Control - The inspectors determined that the licensee properly controls vehicle access to and within'the PA. The inspectors verified that vehicles are properly ' authorized prior to being allowed to enter the PA.
Identification is verified at the vehicle access portal.
This procedure is consistent with the commitments in the Plan The inspectors observed vehicle processing and search, inspected.
vehicle logs, and. interviewed members of-the security force and licensee's security staff about vehicle search procedures.
The inspectors also reviewed the vehicle search procedures and determined that they were consistent with commitments in the Plan. No discrepancies were noted.
6.
Alarm Station and Communications The inspectors observed the operation of'the CAS and determined it was maintained and operated as committed to in the Plan. CAS operators were interviewed by the inspectors and found to be knowledgeable of their duties and responsibilities.
No discrepancies were'noted.
The inspectors also observed tests of communications capabilities in the CAS and reviewed the testing records. All were found to be as committed to in the Plan.
No discrepancies were noted.
7.
Testing, Maintenance and Compensatory Measures The inspectors reviewed the testing and maintenance records and confirmed that the records committed to in the Plan were on file and readily available for licensee and NRC review.
The station uses instrumentation l
t
E
"
.
,
,
'
'
..
and controls (l&C) technicians to conduct preventive and corrective maintenance.on security equipment. L A check of repair records during the
'
last two physical security inspections indicated that repairs,- replace-
-
ments-and testing was not being accomplished in a timely manner.
Corrective actions as identified in Section 2 of this inspection report detail licensee actions to upgrade the security testing'and maintenance program at the plant. The licensee's efforts to upgrade this program will be reviewed during subsequent inspections.
The inspectors also reviewed the licensee's use.of compensatory measures
,
and determined them to be as committed to in the Plan. A minor weakness was identified by the inspectors concerning the licensee's compensatory measures for inoperable and/or ineffective PA assessment aids.
This same weakness had been-identified in the ' license's 1990 annual security program audit report..The inspectors determined that the licensee ~was in compliance-with the Plan, however, the licensee's commitment in the Plan did not appear to be very effective for PA assessment aid compensatory measures.
The licensee agreed to assess the effectiveness of PA assessment aid compensatory measures.
This' item will be reviewed during subsequent inspections.
8.
Security Training and Qualification The inspectors randomly selected and reviewed the' training and qualification records for eight SFMs.
The physical and firearms qualification records for those SFMs were also inspected.
The SFMs selected were armed guards and supervisory personnel.
No deficiencies were noted.
On May 24, 1990, the inspectors observed off-site firearms requalifications for several SFMs at the Putnam, Vermont firearms range.
No deficiencies were.noted.
Several SFMs were interviewed to determine if they possessed the requisite knowledge and. ability to carry out their assigned duties.
The interview results indicated that they were knowledgeable of their job requirements.
No discrepancies were noted.
The licensee continues to administer the training program with three professionals:(1 -supervisor and 2 full-time instructors). At the time of the inspection, the licensee's station security organization consisted of 52 contract personnel (36 armed SFMs,1 unarmed SFM, 9 supervisory personnel, 5 management personnel and 1 clerk).
The inspectors verified that the armed response force meets the commitments in the Plan and that there is always one full-time member of the security organization on-site who has L
the authority to direct security activities.
No deficiencies were noted.
.
%
. -
- - - - - - -
- - -.. - - - - - - - -
- -
.
.
,
.
..
'
~
.
,,.c.'
'
9.
Land Vehicle Bomb Contingency Procedure
- he inspectors conducted a review of the-licensee's Land Vehicle Bomb Contingency Procedure. The licensee's procedure details short-term actions that could be taken to protect against attempted radiological sabotage involving a land vehicle bomb if such a threat were to mr.cerialize.
The procedure appeared adequate for its intended purpose.
No discrepancies'
.were noted.
10.
Exit Interview The inspectors met with the licensee representatives indicated in paragraph 1 at the conclusion of the inspection on May 25, 1990.
At that time, the purpose and scope for the inspection were reviewed, and the findings were presented. The licensee's commitments, as documented in this report, were reviewed and confirmed with the licensee.
.
.
!
'
,