IR 05000272/1987014
| ML18093A397 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Salem, Hope Creek, 05000000 |
| Issue date: | 08/10/1987 |
| From: | Bailey R, Keimig R, Madden T NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML18093A396 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-272-87-14, 50-311-87-17, 50-354-87-15, NUDOCS 8710010368 | |
| Download: ML18093A397 (7) | |
Text
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION S0-354/87-15 S0-272/87-14 Report No /87-17 50-354 S0-272 Docket No NPF-57 DPR-70 license Nos. OPR-75
REGION I
'
Licensee:
Public Service Electric & Gas Company P.O. Box 236 Hancocks Bridge, New Jersey 08038 Facility Name:
Artificial Island Nuclear Generating Stations Inspection At:
Hancocks Bridge, New Jersey Inspection Conducted:
May 18-21, 1987 Type of Inspection: Routine, Unannounced Physical Security
~
Inspector Inspector Api:>roved by:
eguards Section date Inspection Summary:
Routine, Unannounced Physical Security Inspection on May 18-21, 1987 (Combined Inspection Nos. S0-354/87-15, 50-272/87-14, and 50-311/87-17)
Areas Inspected:
Security plan; organization; management effectiveness; security program audits; assessment aids; records and reports; testing and maintenance; physical barriers (protected and vital areas); access control (personnel); training and qualification; and follow-up on an allegation concerning the personnel access control proces Results:
The licensee was in compliance with NRC requirements in the areas inspecte Certain information contained in the allegation was substantiated; however, no violations of NRC requirements were identifie PDR ADOCK 05000272 G
..
.**.*.* -
_ -- -* ****** -
-** __..... w*
_
....,..,...,.._ ****.*,.,-...,*--~r-.;;.-a._.._.;.. ~ca-r..***.-.,,_.-_.*..... ~,,. :,S *.,~.*~ ~ _.__:._l,*u'*.;'.". :.-;..;,, ~ :..*'"'
DETAILS Key Personnel Contacted P.A. Moeller, General Manager, Nuclear Services
- J. T. Bavlish, Manager, Nuclear Security
- D. W. Renwick, Senior Security Supervisor B. C. Weiser; Security Engineering and Planning Staff
- T. H. Deckerd, Security Shift Supervisor
- R. L. Young, Progra~ Manager, Wackenhut
- R. A. Jorgensen, Senior Quality Assurance Engineer J. L. Lark, Quality Assurance Engineer W. R. Schultz, Manager, Quality Assurance
- R. W. Borchardt, NRC Senior Resident Inspector (Hope Creek)
K. H. Gibson, NRC Resident Inspector (Salem)
The inspectors also ir.terviewed other Public Service Electric and Gas Company employees and members of the Wackenhut contract security forc *present at the exit intervie.
Security Plan The licensee submitted Revision 0 to the Artificial Island Security Plan to the NRC, under the provisions of 10 CFR 50.54(p).
Revision 0 reflects the consolidation of the NRC's previously approved plans for the Salem Station and the Hope Creek Station and is currently under NRC revie.
Security Organization The inspectors review-ed the PSE&G Artificial Island Nuclear Security organization char The chart depicts the licensee's management personnel who are responsible for t*he implementation of the security program at Artificial Islan The inspectors verified that the security staff was established and is functioning as depicted on the organization char On April 30, 1987, the licensee awarded a contract to the Wackenhut Corporation for guard force services at Artificial Islan Previously, Protection Technology, Inc. (PTI) provided these service The inspectors discussed this change with representatives of the licensee and Mr. Robert Cobb, a representative of PTI, who was on site during this inspectio Mr. Cobb stated that the transition was accomplished without difficulty and that all but seven members of PTI force had been retained by Wackenhu The inspectors confirmed that all key positions were filled and that the current staffing was consistent with the licensee 1s NRC-approved security pla The inspectors were advised that the pay and benefit plans were retaine The inspectors determined that 16 individuals left the contract security force since January 1, 198 This includes the seven not retained by Wackenhut because of poor performance; four resignations for other
- employment; four others for poor performance (before the new guard force service contract); and one who did not pass the physical qualification These individuals have been replace No deficienci~s were note.
Management Effectiveness The inspectors were advised by the Manager, Nuclear Security that all of the licensee's security shift supervisors, as a group, attended a special management training program between February 2 and 27, 198 The purpose of this training was to convey the duties and responsibilities of a licensee security shift supervisor and to reinforce the supervisors'
knowledge and understanding of the security program, NRC regulations, and plant specific informatio.
Securitx Program Audit The inspectors reviewed the security program audits that were conducted by quality assurance auditor The inspectors determined that the auditors were knowledgeable and had experience in auditing the security progra..1 The lead auditor has been involved in auditing the security program for five year The inspectors observed that the results of the 1986 annual audit had been reviewed by appropriate levels of management and that corrective actions had been ta~en on all audit findings and observation Records and Reports The inspectors conducted a random sampling review of security records and reports for accuracy and completenes The review included: security shift supervisor's log; access control log; audit reports; alarm records; maintenance records; key control logs; CAS/SAS (Central and Secondary Alarm Station) operator logs; and personnel access record No discre-pancies were note.
Testing and Maintenance Maintenance engineers, assigned to support the security program, were observed by the inspectors performing preventive maintenance on personnel search equipment in the security buildin The inspectors determined that preventive maintenance is being routinely performed on this equipment and that, after the maintenance has been completed, a security force super-visor conducts an operational test before the equipment is restored servic The inspectors also determined that the licensee has a program in-place to safeguard computer firmware and software that includes the monitoring and review of system modification Physical Barriers - Protected Area An inspection of the protected area barriers (PABs) on May 18, 1987 by the inspectors found two areas in which minor washout had occurred under the inner fenc These areas were not previously identified by security patrols and were of sufficient size to have been reporte The lice~see
iclnow1edged this fact and took 1mmediite corrective action to repair the area The inspectors noted that 1t had rained considerably during the inspection period:
The licensee advised the inspectors that they would investigate why these areas were not previously identified and reported by the security patrols and tale corrective action, as neede.
Physical Barriers - Vital Areas The inspectors reviewed selected vital areas in the Salem Units 1 & 2 and Hope Creek plants and determined that the security equipment for those ireas is as described in the NRC-approved physical security pla.
Assessment Aids THIS PARAG~A?H CGi.:i Ams SAHGUARDS lt1FOP.M1. T:ON M~U IS NOT FDR PU&UC O.S,..tO...,,,,E i... :: **,.. !'l_l'T;o**A* LY I '-'
.) u f\\, * l.... ln I tril. n
..
LEH BLAN.
/. SAF f GUA:i~f S :t:TmiMA BDN,1
~
....__. _____ _,,_
~--- --*~-~-*----
,_ __________. _______ ---
THIS ~'MU 1 r:rrA:-'
1 ":.ONTAINS Stl~F.GUARD~
lrffO "WI f'.; -~~ * :.; ~~ ~VJT FO!? PUBllC DISC!.OS~hi. i, t~ iNTENT!O~All y LEFT BLAN. Access Control - Personnel
......-... *.-. -.-:~ *.. =
~ *- -:*-. ****-.. -..
The inspectors reviewed the licensee access control process for personnel as a result of an unsigned letter, containing allegations of misapplications, received in NRC Region I on February 5, 198 Following are the findings and conclusions reached by the inspectors during their review of the allegations contained in the lette Allegation Workers currently employed at the site have had trouble with the law in the past.. Sloppy background checks were completed on these worker Finding The inspectors determined, through interviews with security manage-ment personnel, a review of personnel files selected at random, and a review of the access control supervisor's interview log, that there are workers currently at Artificial Island who have had some type of trouble with law enforcement agencies in the pas The inspectors determined that these employees had indicated this in their employ-ment application and*personnel access questionnaires. After the licensee required these employees to satisfy the additional personnel screening requirements, e.g., criminal records checks, drug screen-ing, medical examination, credit checks, checks of listed ~nd developed references, and psychological evaluation, they were granted unescorted access to the site in accordance with the licensee's approved procedu:e (SP-4, Personnel Access Program).
The licensee's representatives stated that they had had problems with the contractor who previously conducted the background investiga-tions, in that the results of the investigations were often delayed and the quality was sometimes poo Additional background investigations had to be performed by the licensee to assure accurate results. That contract was terminated in December, 1986 and a new contractor was hire The licensee's representatives stated that since January, 1987, they have received better quality investi-gations and the results have been timel The inspector found no violations of licensee procedures or NRC requirement *--- -
'*
... * r ** ~.:, **
- *
- ... * ~*..... a ""...a**.:';.......
- **
..
- . *.':.:"..
...... *.....io _.-..11*-:.~*'\\f *..... ~
... ~**.:~.., ** _..;...... 1.-.-*-,..* :-*....... ** ***-*.a,.l.;. -
. :.... *.*..,._............ *.:.'.!.-
'~. *..
Allegation The supervisor in charge of the Personnel Access Cor.trol Program made badge changes 1n the computerized system so that the badges would still work even though the checks had not beer. don Findings The inspector reviewed records and conducted interv:ews with security management personnel and the supervisor of the Pers~nnel Access Progra The senior security manager stated that p-ocedurally, the supervisor of the Access Control Program is authorized to make or direct that changes be made in the computer for a n..nnber of reasons, e.g., to grant a 30 day grace period to employees ~ose general education training date has expired; to change the ~evel of access authorization; to insert new information in the com;uter; and to invalidate access upon receipt of information which is grounds for terminatio The inspector determined from the licensee's procedures that those types of changes can be made either duri~g day shift or off-shift hours by access control office personnel, with the approval of the superviso The records indicate that, duri~g the most recent maintenance outage (August-September 1986), the access control program supervisor and her office staff were called to work on off-shift hours in order to issue badges to workers Dn several occasion The inspectors did not observe any abno-malities in this process and all actions were consistent with the ap;roved procedure The Senior Security Manager stated that, to *ensure -:..hat there is positive control over the information that is ente~d in the access program, the access control program supervisor must personally approve each transactio The inspector verified t~.at this is being don In addition, on-duty security shift supervi~rs verify the information that is programmed into the computer, e=:h shift, to ensure that no errors have been mad A designated security shift supervisor is also authorized on off-shifts to prog*am information into the computer which was previously approved dur:ng the day shift hour In special situations, these designated supervisors may change the access level authorization of an employee, without prior approval, for 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> onl That type of change wust be supported by written documentation that includes a formal reqt.Jest from a operating division manager who has certified that special employee access to areas not previously authorized is required. Those pro-visions are also documented in approved procedure Observation of this process by persons unfamiliar with the access control program may have been the basis for the concern expressed i~ this allegatio The inspector determined that no violation of the l:censee's proce-dures or NRC requirements was identifie Allegation A former PSE&G security supervisor knew about changing badges 1n the security computer and tried to do something about *1 Finding The inspector could not interview the named former security supervisor because he had terminated his employment with the licensee and moved from the are However, the individual's former supervisor stated that the individual terminated his employment with PSE&G pri11arily because his family wanted to relocate to the southern states~
Additionally, the former supervisor stated that the individual was also displeased with a reorganization in the security management staff which abolished his previous position and required him to work on a rotating shift schedule as a shift superviso The former supervisor stated that he could not recall any discussions with him involving the Access Control Program during the course of his employ-men Because the inspector's review into the above allegations did not surface any violations of NRC requirements in the licensee's access control program, the inspector, with the concurrence of his supervision, deemed it unnecessary to pursue this allegation furthe.
Training and Qualification The inspectors conducted a sample review of leison plans, examinations, programs of instruction, training records, and observed a training class in sessio No deficiencies were identified. Training facilities and office space were adequate, well-organized, and clea.
Exit Interview The inspectors met with the licensee representatives indicated in paragraph 1 at the completion of the inspection on May 21, 1987, and summarized the scope and findings of the inspectio No written material was provided to the licensee during this inspection.