IR 05000272/1990023
| ML20062F251 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Salem, Hope Creek  |
| Issue date: | 11/07/1990 |
| From: | Dexter T, Keimig R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20062F258 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-272-90-23, 50-311-90-23, 50-354-90-19, NUDOCS 9011270166 | |
| Download: ML20062F251 (8) | |
Text
.
' r; ;
j ry:
-
AmerR&w u :) %/tt :..,
I'4 ;
.
-
,
W T, AllC,
-.
9////90,.
..,,
U. S, NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION I
50-272/90-23 50-311/90-23
'
Report Nos.
50-354/90,19 50-272 i-50-311 Docket Nos, 50-354 DPR-70
-- -
DPR-75 License Nos, NPF-57 Licensee:
Public Service Electric and Gas Company Facility Name:
Salem and Hope Creek Generating Station Inspection At: Hancocks Bridge, New Jersey i
Inspection Conducted:
September 25-j8,1990 i
Type of Inspection:
Routine, UnantoSnced Physical Security'
,
Inspector:
//ff W M h &
//
f/7 T, W. Dexter, PhyslcaY Security -Inspector
/
ate-
.
J
.~
,
-
,
.
< >M Approved by:
.,
R,~ Keimig7Chie
' Safeguards Section date i
u% pa _
,,
' Division of Radi on Safety and Safeguards Inspection Summary:
Routine, Unannounced Physical Security Inspection l
(Combined Inspection Report Nos. 50-272/90-23, 50-311/90-23, 50-354/90-19)
Areas Inspected-Licensee action on previot, sly identified items and follow-up on actions taken in response to the findings of the Regulatory Effectiveness.
Review (RER) condt.-ted on April 10-14, 1989; Protected snd _ Vital. Area Physical Barriers, Detection $nd Asressment Aids; Protected and Vital Area Access-Control of Personnel, oaci, ages, and Vehicles'.
Results: The licensee was 'n compliance with NRC requirements in the areas'
inspected.
However. potent;al weaknesses were identified in:the areas of Protected Area Detection t.nd Assessment Aids, and Protected Area Lighting, i
9011270166 901109
,
PDR ADOCK 05000272 r
O PDC
.
l
.
,.
.
.
k l
DETAILS 1.0 Key Personnel Contacted Licensee and Contractor Personnel
.t P. A. Moeller, General Manager, Nuclear Services 0. W. Renwick, Manager,. Nuclear Security R. Fisher, Screening Supervisor B. Weiser, Security Engineering and Planning Staff
M. Iranick, Senior Security Regulatory ' Coordinator.-
R. Brown, Licensing, PSE&G
_.
-.
'
M. Pastra, Licensing, PSE&G R. Mathews, Project Manager, Wackenhut
,
U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)
T. Johnson, Senior Resident Inspector, Salem / Hope Creek The above personnel were present at the' exit interview.
i In addition the inspector _also interviewed other licensee employees and
'
l members of the Wackenhut contract security force.
2.0 Licensee Action on Previously Identified Items
2,1 The inspector reviewed the licensee's actions on the following previously identified item :
2.1.1 (Closed) UNR 50-272/89-22-02, 50-311/89-24-02 and 50-354/S9-19-02: On: November 13 and 16, 1989,~the inspectors l
determined, by observations, that,the licensee's protected-area lighting was adequate, but several marginalLareas were-
.
identified.
During this, inspection,- the_ inspector reviewed _ the -
corrective actions taken by the licensee and relevant procedural changes.
The inspector found the corrective actions and the procedures to be satisfactory..
3.0 Fol!cw up en Regulatory Effectiveness Review Findings On April 10-14, 1989, the NRC conducted a Regulatory Effectiveness Review (RER) at the Hope Creek Station. The report of the RER findings was
'
transmitted to-the liccasee on April 26,s1989.
On June 19, 1989, the licensee resperidea to the RER findings by letter and outlined those actions already taken and proposed to correct potential weaknesses that were'
identified.
During the regional security inspection conducted November 13-17, 1989, the inspectors reviewed the' licensee's corrective r
actions completed to that time.
During this inspection, the-inspector reviewed the status of the licensee's action on the items which remained-open.
>
.
-
-
.
,
.
. -.
,
,
-
y
,
.' 2
.
3.1' Following are the results-_of:the inspector's* review of several of th'e-a t
licensee's_ actions that. remained open'at'the, conclusion of Combined.
-
Inspection Nos. 50-272/89-22, 50-311/89-24 andl.50-354/89-19. conducted; on November 13-17,' 1989, o.-
3.1.1 Section 2.2.1-Finding:5,
-
_
-q
'
TdiS PESM?.Hi CDMAlilS SAFEGlTDS
-
1755'?!l G Di FOR PUBilC ~
f UEH2,- fi. IS N31108 tty.
oi-LEFTlill3.
.
This item'is.open and will:be_:: reviewed in a subsequent
"I
= inspection, t
In addition, two locations were:tdentified where: team members beli- )d the' Intrusion Detection System (IDS) could be defeated.-
Location 1
.
- i
.
l
.
n i
l'
.S '
.
->
. il !
J
.k l IEE12 i3 GT (DR PUBilt l
'
'
CEJE, ii !S ':i310KRl0
.
,
"
i.EFi. ids.
'
"
-
,
E R
,
!
J
..
t i
a
_1____d
.
..
..
.
L
'
.
'
Location 2 is3 Pl.:l5:1 CZTAlilS SAFEENE3 1.25? '.! O 131:DT FOR PEUC Ui! ECEE, II IS 1:iT51Tl0MLLY:
- Lf.fi l'!!J:1 Licensee Action The licensee is evaluating two types ofi10S to' determine which-one would be most suitable for ~ this particular application.- The licensee expects the evaluation to be complete-and design of the:
system to begin January 1,1991. _. This item is open and:will-be
_
reviewed _in a subsequent inspection.
3.1.2 Section 2.2.5
'
TBli Pf'IMMI tt! GADS SAFE 0SS3 FJ0RT E f.D 13 EUI IDE INU0 mm%EE, ii IS liiDilEAllY lifi 01/f1
.'
This item will remain.'open and be reviewed _during subsequent inspections.
3.1.3 Section 2.3 2 l
.
THIS PE.1TPil CETA!ilS St,FEGl' ASS.
FriOKE:1 fB 13 E07 TOR PEUC CS0i6SEE, li IS ImiilgAtty.
IEFI P Et.
This item wil'1 remain open and will be reviewed during 'a-sub equent inspection-L
l; l
!
.
-
4..
. -
<
\\
.
.
.
i
'
,
l l
4.0 Mana.gement Effectiveness
!
!
!
During the course of the inspec+ ion, the inspector interviewed several security force members to determine if there were any concerns that could
'
affect plant safety or security.
Several issues not within-the NRC's purview were raised.
However, of note to the inspector was that members
.
of the security force believed they were not receiving clear. messages from I
l first line supervisors when they discussed directions from management.
The inspector discussed this perception with licensee security management for feedback to the security contractor. This matter will be reviewed during subsequent inspections.
5.0 Protected and Vital Area Physical Barriers,-Detection and Assessment Aids c. 1 Protected Area Barrier - The inspector conducted a physical.
inspection of the PA barriers on September 25, 1990. The inspector determined, by observation, that the barr.iers were installed and maintained as described in the Plan.
No deficiencies were noted.
,
5.2 Protected Area Detection Aids - The inspector observed the'PA perimeter detection aids on September 26, 1990, and determined that they were installed, maintained and operated as committed to in the Plan, THIS PAMGMPH CETAlHS SAFEGl!AES 16Esil] !B 13 HDI FOR PlRIC DIStiGST.E, li 13 IHENT!0911Y LEFT DlAU.
l The systems are being aggressively tested each quarter and those concerns that were previously identified have been corrected.
5.3 Isolation Zones - The inspector ver.ified that isolation zones were adequately maintained to permit. observation of: activities on both l
sides of the PA barrier.
No discrepancies'were noted.
l 5.4 Protected Area and Isolation Zone Lighting 'The inspector conducted a lighting survey.of the PA and isolation zones on September 26, 1990..
The inspector determined, by observations, that the lighting was very good.
Since the 'last inspection, the licensee has revised the procedures to address compensatory measures.for inadequate lighting with more specificity.
t
<
l However, the inspector found two areas that required additional lighting to supplement the lights already.present and one area where-bushes reduced the available lighting.
The licensee took.immediate compensatory actions and committed to correct the deficiencies-This
.
item will be reviewed during subsequent inspections.
t
l'
d l
";
r
.
..
.
.
.
't 5.5 Assessment Aids - The inspector observed the PA' perimeter assessment aids and determined that they were generally: installed, maintained and operated as committed to in the Plan.
(See also Section 3.1.5 of this report.)
' '
5.6 Vital Area Barriers - The inspector conducted ~a physical inspection oT several VA barriers on September-26tand 27, 1990. -The inspector
determined, by observation, that the' barriers-were. installed.and
,
maintained as described in' the Pl.an..No discrepancies were noted.
5.7 Vital Area Detection Aids - The inspector observed the VA detection
,
aids and determined that they were installed, maintained and.
>!
operated as committed ton the Plan.
No discrepancic; were noted.
5.8 Fill Lines for Plant Diesel Generators FuM 011 Tanks THIS PARAGRAPH CONIAINS SAFEGUlJ1DS l
IMGTC) n313 NDI FOR PU6tle
'
'
0!S0l0SU."E, ll IS INTEHil0NAllY Irryc!jtg This is an unresolved item and will be reviewed during subsequent-inspections.
(UNR 50-272/90-23-01, 50-311/90-23-01 and 50-354/90-19-01.)
6.0 Protected and Vital Area' Access Control of Personnel. Pack' ages and Vehicles-6.1 Personnel Access Cont.ml - The inspector determined that the
..
. licensee was exercising pe=itive control over personnel access to the PA and VAs.
This determination was based on the-following:
6.1.1 The inspector verified that personnel are properly identified and authorizationtis checked prior to' issuance of badges and
,
key-cards.
No~ discrepancies were noted.
'
6.1 -. 2 The inspector verified that the licensee has a program.to.
confirm the trustworthiness and reliability of employees and
'
contractor personnel.. No discrepancies were-noted.
6.1.3 The inspector verified that the licensee has a search program,.
as committed to in the-Plan, for firearms, explosives,
!
incendiary devices and other. unauthorized materials. The
!
inspector observed personnel access processing during shift changes, visitor ~ access processing, and interviewed members of the security fo'rce :and ' licensee's security staff 'about personnel access procedures.
No discrepancle's were noted.
.
.
.
.
.
,
'
.
.
,
6.1.4 The inspector determined, by observations, that individuals in the PA and VAs display their access badges as required. No
,
discrepancies were noted.
6.1.5 The inspector verified that the -licensee has escort procedures for visitors to the PA and VAs, No discrepancies were noted.
6. P.
Package and Material Access Control - The inspector determined that-the licensee was exercising positive control over packages and material that are brought into the PA at the main access portal.
The inspector reviewed the package and material control-procedures and found that'they were consistent with commitments.in.the Plan.
The inspector also observed package and material processing and y
interviewed members of'the security force and the licensee s security staff about package and material control procedures.
The licensee l1s maintaining a very aggressive package search program.at the main access portal to. prevent contraband from being brought into the PA.-
The licensee has a random search program that ensures approximately-
35 percent of all packages being-hand-carried are physically inspected by a SFM in addition to being processed through.the X-ray
'
device. No discrepancies were:noted.
6.3 Vehicle Access Control - The inspector determined that'the licensee properly controls vehicle access to'and within the TA. The inspector verified that vehicles are properly authorized prior to l
being allowed to enter the PA,. Identification is verifted by the
'
UM at the vehicle access portal.
This procedure is c,nsistent with the commitments in the Plan. The-inspector observed vehicle-
~
processing and search, inspected vehicle logs,_and interviewed-members of the security. force and. licensee's security staf f about-
,
vehicle search procedures. The inspector also resiewed vehicle
- ^
search procedures and determined they were consistent with commitments in the Plan.
However, on September 26, 1990, the inspector, accompanied by a security force supervisor and two members of the licensee's secu'ity staff, found all of the on-site ' emergency vehicles with.their keys in the ignition and parked in an' unsecured garage in the.PA. A member of de licensee's security staff immediately-removed the keys
- and gave:them to the supervisor of the fire and safety team on duty; The. inspector determined thatteach vehicle was equipped with an immobilization device that would have to have been defeated in order to move a vehicle. 'However, the licensee committed to change the practice of leaving.the' keys in the vehicles. = The' keys will be -
controlled.by fire and safety personnel in the. future'.
In addition,
-
the licensee modified the fire and safety personnel. procedure by.
l adding a paragraph to address.the' security of the vehicle keys.
l l
!
,.
-
,
..
'-
-e.
!
e f-
<
'. 9
.,
-
g
- '.
-
s
.
,,.. - -
.e
,
- 0
..
'
+
.
.
.
,.
..,
,
,. s p.
' : *
i, p
p
- i.
..
,,
g:
'
g. _,
4.
"
s'
.-
-.
Y.-
-
y
_
- +.
.
. - '
.,
,.
,
.
.
?
.
r.,
.... :
...
,i
'*' '
y
.
,.
,
\\,.
, [
N
"'
.
.
.
g W
.
'
s'
.<
.-
n.
__
.
,
_.
s
'
y;_
%.,
.s
,
-
.
a.
- y'
...
_.,'.,,
.
y
. -
,
e.
-.
%.
,
'
-
.
"
,
.
,.
,
- ,
,
s
,
+
,
- -
.
.
,
.,.. 7
.
,
5..
.
-
y
..
,
r
,
-
-
'-
. ?
.A.
-
..
,t'
s
%:
r
-
. - '
s
,e, q
- '
. s*
.
<.,
.
>
-
...
e.
j,
-
s.
~..
.-
.y s
,
.-
.
.'.
h
.
A g
,
..
,-,
.. -
,
.,
,.
.
,,
< :..
-
,
,?
,
.9..
i
...
,
. '
+
- .
g
.
b
'
a
,
Y'
%
.
,
.
'
e
.,
.,
.
y
,
x
.
p
,
,
..
.
+
., -
u
.
.
.;
.,. -,
s..
e.,
,
..
_
,
,
"
g
.'.4 n
f i
,.,
"
'
.
i'
" *
'
[
,
.
g. p ep,
- ' ' :
'.
$
v i
'e X
...
.
,
s
.
g
..y
. y
...
.
..,.
.
,. ; -
,
+
.
'
A'
.,.
. 8
.
+
.,,
v.,;
e
,
, b.
.,
-
c
. ~
.
,..,
.
.-,
C
'
,
.
c,
.
... $
f4
- ~
'
'
_
,
e
,
y.
j
.,
.
g
,
-
s
. -
...
.
,.
.
.
n.'
,
s
-
+
^s
- '
^
2.
t
-
f.. -
,
.
.
,
.
g
,
'
e s,
-
-
.
.
,
,
.,
.
.
M+
,
~
s
'
A s
e
,
t
'
y.
',..,
,
p.
v.y
..,
.
,
,
-
?>
. *
,.
e
',.
} y
-
.
I e-
p
.
..
.-M g
. -,
- '*
, ;
,
.
,
e.
.
.
- -
- ?
.
t
-
y..'
e
.,
.y -, i
..y:
.
'
&
,
4-a t
1
'
,
,',
,,,
- 4
.A v
. -
-.
g..
+,
p.
,,
a
'
?
.
e L
,
s.
- .
j, -.
y s
t
.
,4
,
,
'
,
,
.
-
,,
"bW
,
,
,
'
-
.
y
'.
y,
.
g
.
A
.
>.. -
.
o
,
,.
V
" +.-
' -
7.
., ' 'i ;* p*.
.
A.,
.
!*--
[
t
,
,,
^
g
r,,
.
'
,
N,,
-
-.
tb.
-
'4
,,
,,
~~
.
-
-
,
.. t
e'm;
..-
<
,
,
I f
.
.
s
'
a
'
e
,
3,
,
.
n-
'
.
~
.
$
' '
[
,
g
.
-.
,-
y
,
e.
. f,
-.
,
8
.
.
- ;
'
~
h
,
t
.
,
., *
a
, ' :.'
.'
-
.
s
.
N
$ -.
K'
g
.
M h *
e is.
.
s s*i j,
a
.
'..
.
_
,,
.
e.
f U
'
t
- r 7,.
.
.
-
..
e.g-v.
.y
. _
,
e
,,0 g;,
- +
s
,
.
. -
'
w '-
t
.
.
$
.' *
k
.
-
.
e
-
>
.,.,
,.
- * -
g
-
- . ~. 4 '. ' %
.
,
~
-
'
'4
. -
..
,,.
^t s
,
..
....
g
' *
- g j
.
.
,,
,
,
,
.
&.
-
. b
'"
4
. g S
'
.
i ea.,
.,
i
.
.
r
'g.
..
'
.
-
.
=
-
i
.
-
s
- -, '
x
.
.
..
g
.
V
M'.
,*
.
.
.
"
q
'
,
g
- '
I
.
.,
.
,,
., '
-'
).
.
. '.
I e '
- .
g,,'
W
,):
,,'p-
- ^
b
,er >.,
." y
't.'
-
-.
c
'
.
- (
'
9-
ir A
'
-
g
,
t. -
m
- Nt i
.
c...
s
.
a
' : '..
.
'
'
Y y,. - *
.*
.
-
s.
.'$
t'
.
'
.#?
',
Y
,
,
'
'
'
,
4
- .
.'
'*
'
+
-
a 2,,'
,.,
-k %
.
...
?
[-
.
- -
.,
-
e
.
. 1 c.
_
c
'
,g
,
. +- *
g
+
.,
.
- --
g h
.s
.
g.
.
y's
,
,e
..
- - '.
- ,
.
g>
'l 5,
- . 4
,
, k
. <, *
,
3$
^ '
-e
,
,-
t
- 4v
,.,
,
.
y'
+
'
.
- .
i
'
O
+
'
.
,,
t
- ,
...
.
,..,
..
-.._,
,. - _.. g
-
.o.
.
. -
.
..,*
'
s
.
..
4..
s?,e
.
4:
'
A,
,., _
s
,
e
.t
,. i I
a.
"
. a,,
Jr
-,,
,_ : -
-' e
- -
.
q
4Y =.
s
~
Fkr,
.:
.
N
-.. -
-
.
.
.
.x
-
e
- .
,,. - -
t,,
, ".
,
,
, ' ^*
..,
a t.
.'.+ ' -:
- ..
'
- ~
'T
".'
,.
+.
..,
-
4 -, '*:
s,
>.
,',.,.'
,
-g'?,
r-.
,.
^4-u
,
.w-4'
.
t, e
.
h*.
.,
-
-r 4 2 e
_ g
,
.g
-
,, ;
-
.g.
,3s....
,.
-
.
.......,.-
..
+-
s e-
-,..
..
.
.gw
.
.
.
i -
,-i
.. r*
- ,
y
., i
u 4,'
.
-
.,
. '.
e'
'
'
^
'
.
y
.
.
- ..
-
a.-
@
.
e
.
v
. *-.
's
.
..
-
,
. -
...
,
f'."_lc '. ; -.
'.h
.
nl
.
[ J.
'
,N
-
e'
L' y
-
'
w-
- -
,
-
'
-
-
.
'se
-
>
,
.
,
,
'.';'
, _ _
.
,
.
'
'
'
'
,,
.
$'.
.
-
p
._
.
,,.. u,.
.,.
~,,
-
- '
>
.
r
..,, w
-.
,
. r
.,
',
". p
,'e (,
.
t
>
a
,
..
- -
e..
'
- ~
C-
....
N
'
k,.
M-
- . +.
- ' ' q
,
-
.y
i-
.
r
,
, '
E.
.,,
b a
'
,
.
.
...r
'
'
'
'
'
,
t
-
-
-
,,. -