IR 05000271/1993015

Insp Rept 50-271/93-15 on 930712-16.No Violations Noted. Major Areas Inspected:Access Authorization Program & Administration & Organization,Background Investigation Elements,Psychological Evaluations & Behavioral Observation

ML20056D504
Person / Time
Site:	Vermont Yankee
Issue date:	08/04/1993
From:	Albert R, Keimig R, Limroth D NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
To:
Shared Package
ML20056D500	List: IR 05000271/1993015 ML20056D499
References
50-271-93-15, NUDOCS 9308170016
Download: ML20056D504 (8)

Text

,

r I

r

.

.

U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

REGION I

Report No.: 50-271/93-15 Docket No.: 50-271 License No.: DPR-28 Licensee: Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corooration RD 5. Box 169 Ferry Road Brattleboro. Vermont 05301 Facility Name: Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corooration Inspection At: Vernon and Brattleboro. Vermont Inspection Conducted: July 12-16.1993 Inspectors: n2e'4 d Of"C E' M R. h. Albert [ Physical Security Inspector Date tl M. fu 8395 D. F. Limroth, Senior Reactor Engineer Date Approved By: a 8-Nf5 '

'

41. R. Keimig, Cl) /, Safeguards Section Date Division of Radiition Safety and Safeguards t i

Areas Insoccted: Access Authorization Program Administration and Organization-Background Investigation Elements; Psychological Evaluations; Behavioral Obsenation;

"Grandfathering," Reinstatement, Transfer and Temporary Access Authorization; Denial / Revocation of Unescorted Access; Audits; and Records Retentio ;

Results: The licensee's Access Authorization Program provides reasonable assurance that 1

~

- individuals who are authorized unescorted access to the station are trustworthy and reliable, and do not constitute an undue risk to the health and safety of the public, as a result of_ their unescorted access to the statio ,

l i

i

.

f 9308170016 930804 PDR ADOCK 05000271 G ppg ,

I m _ _ - - _ _

.

.

DETAILS 1.0 Backcround On April 25,1991, the Commission published the Personnel Access Authorization Requirements for Nuclear Power Plants,10 CFR 73.56, (the rule), which requires that each licensee authorized on that date to operate a nuclear reactor pursuant to 10 CFR 50.21 implement an Access Authorization Program by April 27,1992, to comply with the requirements of 10 CFR 73.56, and that such program be incorporated into the licensee's Physical Security Plan. The rule requires that licensees establish and maintain an Access Authorization Program with the objective of providing high assurance that individuals granted unescorted access are trustworthy and reliable, and do not constitute an unreasonable risk to the health and safety of the public, including a potential to commit radiological sabotag This inspection, conducted in accordance with NRC Inspection Manual Temporary Instruction 2515/116, Access Authorization, assessed the licensee's Access Authorization Program and its implementation to determine if the regulatory requirements reflected in its Physical Security Plan, in response to the rule, were being met. The licensee's Physical Security Plan was previously reviewed by the NRC and was found to be acceptable (NRC letter dated July 19, 1992).

2.0 Access Authorization Procram Administration and Oreanization The Access Authorization Program for the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station is described in the document, Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corporation Access Authorization Program, Revision 1, dated May 7,1993, approved by the Plant Manager. The program's implementation is prescribed in the procedure DP 0896, Access Authorization, Revision 1, dated July 9, 1993, approved by the Technical Services Superintendent. The inspectors reviewed these documents in detail in order to assess their adequacy for the definition and implementation of the program. Functional responsibilities were found to be clea Through interviews, the inspectors determined that personnel responsible for the administration and implementation of the program elements, including the Access Program Coordinator who is responsible for ensuring that the requirements of the Access Authorization Program have been met prior to a, ranting unescorted access authorization, were familiar with their dutie . -

.

.

2.2 Backcround Investication Elements - '

,

The inspectors reviewed records and conducted interviews to determine the adequacy of the program to verify the true identity of an applicant and to develop information concerning employment history, educational history, credit history, criminal history, military service and character and reputation of the applicants prior to granting unescorted access to protected and vital areas. The inspectors reviewed the results of 17 background investigations (bis) representing a cross-section of licensee and contractor employee The licensee employed one contractor to conduct bis. The scope and depth of ,

these investigations are prescribed in the licensee's contract with the BI contractor. This document was reviewed and determined to prescribe the requisites to satisfy the licensee's program commitments. The reports of the <

investigations which were reviewed were found to be in compliance with the contract and provided background information on which to base a determination for access authorizatio .

Those 17 BI reports also contained the information on which temporary access ;

was granted or denied. The records of these abbreviated scope and depth investigations, permitted by the rule, contained information on which to base a determination regarding temporary access pending completion of the full BI and fulfilled the program requirements to which the licensee had committe It was noted that any matter of questionable or suspect information was promptly reported to the licensee by the BI contractor with adequate detail to permit reasonable determination regarding granting or denying of temporary acces Records of completed bis contained a summary ofinformation developed during the conduct of the investigations. The inspectors determined through interviews and reviews of records that these records were reviewed by responsible licensee personnel and, in those cases where questionable or derogatory information had been reported, that the licensee had adjudicated the results of those investigation l The licensee has accepted the access authorization program for two of its primary contractors. Additionally, the licensee has accepted the BI portion of the access authorization program for 10 contractors conditioned upon the contractors' use of one of the three BI contractors that the licensee periodically audits in compliance with the commitments of its NRC-approved Security Plan. Satisfactory completion of a BI, review thereof, and results satisfying the Evaluation Criteria for Unescorted Access Authorization (Section 7 of the l

l

.

.

4 licensee's Access Authorization Program) must be certified by the contractor / vendor as a prerequisite to the licensee's granting unescorted access authorization to an individua ;

The inspectors noted that the licensee provided its contractors with a copy of its Access Authorization Program. This document contained a list of disqualifying attributes which enabled the contractors to screen out persons -

who most probably would not be granted unescorted access by the license This practice reduced workload on the licensee personnel who administered the ,

program and resulted in very few denial .3 Psychological Evaluation The licensee has contracted with a large psychological hospital to perform the :

requisite psychological evaluations. While some contractors had an acceptable psychological evaluation program, all individuals seeking unescorted access to the facility were required to complete the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) or MMPI 2 administered by the consultant or by a licensee employee trained by the consultant in the administration and procuring of the :

test. The answer sheets were scored by the consultant and, if indicated, a l clinical interview was conducted by a state-licensed psychologist who provided i a recommendation regarding access or denial to the beense l

The inspectors interviewed the licensee employee who administered and proctored the tests. This person demonstrated a sound knowledge of the associated duties and reflected a satisfactory comprehension of the responsibilities as enumerated to the inspectors by one of the psychological consultants previously interviewed by the inspectors. The inspectors i concluded that this aspect of the program was effectively administere i l

2.4 hehavioral Ohservation l l

The licensee's behavioral observation program (BOP) was inspected to i determine whether the licensee had a training and retraining program to ensure that supervisors had the awareness and sensitivity to detect changes in behavior l which could be indicative of adverse trustworthiness or reliability and to report such to appropriate licensee management for evaluation and action. The program was instituted as part of, and is an element in common with, the licensee's fitness-for-duty progra i The inspectors reviewed the licensee's trainmg program associated with the BOP. All employees, both licensee and contractor, are provided training in behavioral observation as part of the General Employment Training (GET)

program related to escort training. Licensee supervisors are trained to

.

.

standards which meet or exceed the requirements of 10 CFR 26, the NRC's Fitness-for-Duty rule. Additionally, supervisors were provided specialized annual training related to identification of aberrant behavior conducted by the consultant that provided psychological screenin Interviews of 12 personnel, representative of a cross section of licensee and contractor employees, both supervisory and non-supervisory, indicated that the training program was effective. The inspectors also detennined that these persons were aware of their responsibility to report arrests to the license .5 "Grandfatherine." Reinstatement. Transfer and Temoorary Access Authorization The licensee's records were reviewed to ascertain that personnel who did not meet the criteria for "grandfathering", i.e., those who did not have uninterrupted, unescorted access authorization for at least 180 days on April 25,1991, had not been granted unescorted access authorization without having satisfied the elements of the program. No discrepancies were note >

The licensee's program for reinstatement of unescorted access authorization was reviewed. The program provided for reinstatement when the previous authorization was terminated under favorable conditians within 365 days and training, medical and radiological protection requirements had been complete Additionally, for those persons whose access authorization has lapsed more than 30 days, the program required that the individual's activities during the .

'

period be verified and that the individual's employment / unemployment history, including " Suitable Inquiry" be verified "as described in Section 6.2 of this

'

program." The inspectors noted that the Employment History subsection of Section 6.2 defined the employment history portion of the BI program and, as such, required an employment check for the past five years. In practice, the activities of an individual whose access authorization had been terminated for more than 30 but less than 365 days was ascertained as described in the

!

Clarification to the Guidelines of Regulatory Guide 5.6 Funher, the subsection of Section 6.2 that addressed " Suitable Inquiry" as a best effort attempt to ascertain whether the individual had been tested positive for drugs, subject to a plan for treating substance abuse, removed from or made ineligible for activities within the scope of 10 CFR 26, or denied access or employment as a result of fitness-for-duty policy, was in consonance with the 10 CFR 26 definition of " suitable inquiry;" however, the specific points regarding an individual's activities during the period of absence and the potential for those activities to affect the individual's trustworthiness and -

reliability was not addressed in a " suitable inquiry" as intended by the L

.

.

6 .

Clarification to the Guidelines. This requirement, however, has been l addressed in a " Statement of Activities" in which the individual requesting reinstatement certifies that activities would not impact on reliability and trustworthiness as it relates to NRC licensed nuclear power station The licensee agre.d to review and clarify the above issues. This will be reviewed during a future inspection (IFI 50-271/93-1541).

The inspectors determined that the licensee had established procedures to govern receipt and transfer of access authorization data from/to other licensees. The inspectors reviewed records of access authorizations transferred and received, and determined that the records of these transfers were complete, accurate, and conducted in accordance with licensee's procedure ,

The personnel records of bis that were inspected also contained the records of the results of the limited scope background investigations on which temporary

'

access authorizations were based. The inspectors determined that these records satisfied the licensee's commitments for the granting of temporary ,

access authorizations. In the records reviewed, the inspectors noted no instance in which temporary access authorization was subsequently revoked on the basis of information developed during the full B With the exception of the above observations related to the apparent confusion with respect to ascertaining of activities in conjunction with reinstatement of access authorization, the inspectors concluded that these aspects.of the program satisfied regulatory commitment .6 Denial / Revocation of Unescoded Access ,

The inspectors reviewed the licensee's procedures for revocation or denial of

'

unescorted access for licensee and contractor personnel and determined that appropriate measures were in place to satisfy program commitments with respect to appeals and review. The review process was being conducted at an appropriate management leve As mentioned in Section 2.2, the licensee is providing to its contractors its list of attributes that disqualify a person from unescorted access authorizatio This has resulted in few submissions of questionable candidates. As a result, :

denials are few and, per interviews with the Security Manager, no appeals have been submitte The record of one individual who was denied access was reviewed. The  !

individual had been notified of his appeal right; however, the individual did not avail himself of this optio . -- _ , -

.

.

.

7 Audits The inspectors reviewed the contract between the licensee and the BI '

contractor and the audit of that contractor's product. The audit report was found to be comprehensive and included appropriate reference inquiries to i ensure the veracity of the investigation ,

The inspectors reviewed the access authorization program requirements prescribed by the licensee in contracts with two large contractors that provide outage and technical support. The inspectors also reviewed the repons of recent audits conducted by the Shared Nuclear Access Authorization Audit ;

Group (SNAAAG) of these contractors' programs. The access authorization >

programs of these contractors were accepted by the licensee. The audit ;

reports were found to be extremely comprehensive. The audit repons and

.

j contractor correspondence in response to findings and/or recommendatic,ns had !'

been reviewed at appropriate licensee management level ,

The inspectors' review of the report of the audit of the licensee's program required by 10 CFR 73.56, conducted by the Yankee Nuclear Service Division j Audit Group, was found to be of adeq.uate scope and breadth to detect problem ,

areas. The inspectors noted that the section of the audit report that addressed 1

"grandfathering" quoted the conditions from NUMARC 89-01, Section 11.0, j GRANDFATHERING; however, USNRC Regulatory Guide 5.66, to which  !

the licensee is committed (and which endorses NUMARC 89-01), takes exception to this section. All records of persons " grandfathered" that were .I reviewed by the inspectors satisfied the requirements specified in the Regulatory Guide 5.66 exception. The licensee agreed to resolve this 'l discrepancy with the. Audit Grou !

!

,

' Record Retention The inspectors reviewed the licensee's record retention activities to ensure that !

required records were being retained for the appropriate duration. The j inspectors determined that records 're retained aporopriately and that the ;

storage facilities provided adequate security to preveat access to personal information by unauthorized personnel, j I

3.0 Exit Interview I An exit interview was conducted on July 16,1993, at the Vermont Yankee Statio l The personnel listed below were present. During this meeting, the inspectors -l reviewed the scope and findings of the inspection. The licensee acknowledged the inspection finding' I

!

l

.

j

'

t t-f:

- . ,

Other licensee and contractor personnel were. contacted / interviewed by the inspectors in the conduct of the inspectio ,

Exit Interview Attendees; ,

R. Wanczyk, Plant Manager

'

J. Herron, Technical Services Superintendent G. Morgan, Security Manager S. Racz, Quality Assurance Engineer P. Harris, Resident Inspector, USNRC i

,

M l

!

l

!

!

1

,

l l

,

.' a g.g .: _ . , , , -