IR 05000272/1993018

Physical Security Program Insp Repts 50-272/93-18, 50-311/93-18 & 50-354/93-17 on 930607-11.No Safety Concerns or Violations Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Security Program Plans & Protected & Vital Area Physical Barriers

ML20045G662
Person / Time
Site:	Salem, Hope Creek
Issue date:	06/30/1993
From:	Albert R, Keinig R, King E NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
To:
Shared Package
ML20045G663	List: IR 05000272/1993018
References
50-272-93-18, 50-311-93-18, 50-354-93-17, NUDOCS 9307150021
Download: ML20045G662 (5)

Text

-

-_

.

SMEGUARDS II;F0EMATICil DETE; SHAT:0:1 i;ADE I!Y#ecMr

[

Ttt

~

U.S. NUCLEAR FEGULATORY COMMISSION

REGION I

l 50-272/93-18 50-311/93-18

'

Report Nos.: 10-154/93-17 50-272 50-311 Docket Nos.: 50-354 DPR-70 DPR-75 License Nos.: NPF-57 Licensee:

Public Service Illectric and Gas Company Facility Name:

Salem and Hore Creek Generating Stations Inspection At:

Hancocks Bridge. New Jersey inspection Conducted:

Lune 7-11.1993 Inspectors:

add 4-v 6-#i-93 R. J. Albert, PhysicaQurity Inspector Date fdwo x e 4/

4.t9-93 E. B. King, Physical Qty Inspector Date Approved By:

6-h -93 Af. R. Keihng, i, Safeguards Section Date Division of Radu ion Safety and Safeguards Areas insoected: Security Program Plans; Protected and Vital Area Physical Barriers and

.

Detection Aids; Protected and Vital Area Access Control of Vehicles; Alarm Stations and Communications; Power Supply; and Security Training and Qualification.

Results: The licensee's security program was directed toward public health and safety. No safety concerns or violations of NRC requirements were identified in the areas inspected. Minor potential weaknesses were identified in vehicle searches and in a Central Alarm Station activity.

<

9307150021 930630

.

PDR ADOCK 05000272

PDR

.. -.

I

-

,

.

i

<t.

i

DETAUE 1.0 Key _ Personnel Corttittled 1.1 Licensee R. Fisher, Screening Supervisor J. Fleming, Senior Staff Engineer - Quality Assurance (QA) Audits M. Ivanick, Senior Security Regulatory Coordinator J. Lillis, Site Services Supervisor J. Loeb, Security Support Staff Assistant S. Mannon, Licensing and Regulation P. Moeller, Manager - Site Protection D. Renwick, Nuclear Security Manager

'

R. Savage, Senior Staff Engineer - QA Audits C. Weiser, Senior Staff Engineer 1.0 Contractor R. Matthews, Security Program Manager, The Wackenhut Corporation (TWC)

P. Tetreault, Operations Manager, TWC 1.3 LS. Nuclear Reculatory Commission - Recion 1 J. Schoppy, Resident Inspector The inspectors also interviewed other licensee personnel and members of the contract security force during this inspection.

2.0 Security Program Plittis The inspectors verified that changes to the licensee's Security, Contingency, and Guard Training and Qualification Plans, as implemented, did not decrease the effectiveness of the respective plans, and were submitted in accordance with NRC requirements. No deficiencies were identified.

3.0 Protected and Vital Area Physical llarriers and Detection Aids 3.1 Protteted Area (PA) Ita_r_ tic _r The inspectors conducted a physical inspection of the PA barrier on June 7,1993, and determined by observation that the barrier was installed and maintained as

'

described in the NRC-approved physical security plan (the Plan).

<

>

~

-., -.

-_-__

.

.

.

3 3.2 PA Detection Aids The inspectors observed the licensee performing scheduled tests of the PA perimeter intrusion detection aids on June 9,1993. The inspectors determined that the detection aids were installed, maintained and generally operated as committed to in the Plan. The inspectors observed that one section of a intrusion detection system (IDS) zone failed a performance test.

The licensee took immediate compensatory measures and repaired the IDS. The IDS was retested and performed satisfactorily. The inspectors' review of testing documentation determined that the IDS had tested satisfactorily on numerous previous occasions.

-

3.3 Vital Area (VA) Ilarriers The inspectors conducted a physical inspection of selected VA barriers on June 10,1993, and determined by observation that the barriers were installed and maintained as described in the Plan.

3.4 VA Detection Aids The inspectors observed testing of selected VA detection aids on June 10, 1993, and netermined that they were installed, maintained and operated as committed to in the Plan.

Except as noted in Section 3.2, no deficiencies were identified in these areas.

4.0 Protected and Vital Area Access Control of Personnel and Vehides 4.1 Personnel Access Control The inspectors determined that the licensee was exercising positive control over personnel access to the PA and VAs. This determination was based on the following:

4.1.1 The inspectors verified that the licensee takes precautions to ensure that an unauthorized name cannot be added to the access list by having a member of rnanagement review the list every 31 days.

4.1.2 The inspectors reviewed the security k>ck and key procedures and determined that they were consistent w3.h commitments in the Plan. The inspectors also reviewed the protected.md vital area key inventory logs, and discussed lock and key procedures vith members of the security force

and the licensee's security staff.

<

\\

'

. _ - _ _ _

..

.

)

4.1.3 The inspectors verified that the licensee has a mechanism for expediting access to vital equipment during emergencies and that the mechanism is I

adequate for its purpose.

l 4.1.4 The inspectors verified that unescorted access to VAs is limited to authorized individuals. The access list is revalidated at least once every

31 days as committed to in the Plan.

4.2 Vehicle Access Control The inspectors determined that the licensee properly controlled access to and within the PA. The inspectors verified that vehicles were properly processed prior to entering the PA. The process was consistent with commitments in the Plan.

I Jp,jg PSl@ DH C0iiIAlE3 SENE W S p m r 3 y)131;3T fE f G hh;NE; 11 IS INIDilWM J

l gn EUJE l

l The inspectors reviewed procedures, post orders and lesson plans for vehicic searcMs. Based on those reviews, the inspectors determined that factory sealed items were exempt from search but the guidance was not clear on how to verify factory seals.

In addition, the lesson plans and the instructors who were interviewed by the inspectors indicated that a vehicle was to be searched from start to Gnish by a single search officer. In actuality, a team search approach had evolved. A team approach is effective, but only if the officers communicate appropriately to insure that the entire vehicle and its cargo is correctly searched.

The licensee committed to review this aspect of its program and take appropriate corrective actions. This area will be reviewed during a subsequent inspection.

t lixcept as noted in Section 4.2, no deficiencies were identified in these areas.

5.0 Alantditations.and Commp_nicatierts The inspectors observed the activities in the Central Alarm Station (CAS) and the Secondary Alarm Station (S AS). The CAS and SAS were maintained and operated as

!

i

-

-

-

-

-

-

- -

-

-

-

. -

-

-

.-

.

-

~j'

l

.

lf

l committed to in the Plan. CAS and SAS operators were interviewed by the inspectors and were found to be knowledgeable of their duties and responsibilities. The inspectors verified that the CAS and SAS operators do not perform any operational activities that-would interfere with assessment and response functions.

T1115 PARABRAPil 00!iTAINS SAFEBUARDS li!T0? MAT 10ll AMD 13 NOT FOR PUBilC CISCLOSIDE; IT IS INTENTIONALLY

.

LEFT BLAhl J

The licensee committed to review this aspect of its program and take corrective actions as necessary. This area will be reviewed during a subsequent inspection.

6.0 Emercency Power SupyJ.y The inspectors veri 6ed that there are several systems (batteries, dedicated station diesel generators within VAs, a security diesel generator) that provide backup power to the security systems.

The inspectors reviewed the test and maintenance records and procedures for these systems and found that they were consistent with the Plan. No deficiencies were noted.

!

7.0 Security Trainine and Oualification The inspectors observed weapons requalification training on June 9,1993. The training consisted of daytime and low-light qualification for the handgun and the shotgun. In addition, stress and familiarization firing were also observed. No deficiencies were identified.

8.0 Exit Interview The inspectors met with the licensee representatives indicated in Section 1.0 at the conclusion of the inspection on June 11,1993. 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 reviewed and confirmed with the licensee.

The licensee representatives present acknowledged the findings of the inspection.

'

t

,

-..,

.

-

.

.