IR 05000277/1988031

Partially Deleted Insp Repts 50-277/88-31 & 50-278/88-31 on 880827-29 (Ref 10CFR73.21).Violation Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Mgt Effectiveness,Assessment Aids - Protected Area & Access Control - Personnel

ML20154L187
Person / Time
Site:	Peach Bottom
Issue date:	09/08/1988
From:	Cameron D, Keimig R, Lancaster W NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
To:
Shared Package
ML20154L141	List: IR 05000277/1988031 ML20154L138 ML20154L175
References
50-277-88-31, 50-278-88-31, NUDOCS 8809260118
Download: ML20154L187 (6)

Text

_ _ _ .

.

.

Enna BY:

]DSW1*4 (:;;; .;

,dl ir p :':n 52) g

'

,

m. xz r.a -os ( t /J.. a ;.C; 2 ) f DrE)

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

REGION I

88-31 Report Nos. 83-31 50-277 D:cket N DPR-44 License N OPR-56 Licensee: Philadelphia Electric Company 2301 taarket Street Iniladelphia, Pennsylvania 19101 Facility Name: Peach Bottom Atornic Power Station, Units 2 & 3 Irspection At: Delta, Pennsylvania lespectior Conducted: August 27-29. 19]S Type of I.:' ection: h tine, Unannounced Physical Security

.

Cate of Last Physical Security Inspection: July 25-29, 1983 I*spectors:

' '

b Cdd S [$

W. K. Lancaster, Physical Security Inspector date

\ . 6 #

D. F. Cameror, Fhysical Security inspector Q d a t e'l-

.

_

/7 Approved by: /6.' ..f'but-cf 9-8-88 fehard R. r: mig, Ch)e , Safeguards Section

~

date Facilities Radiologic Safety and Safeguards Branch, DRSS 1*scection Su. mary: Routine, Unannourted Physical Security Inspection on A. gust 27-29,1933 (Co-bined Report No: 53-277/SE-31 and 50-275/$$-31)

A eas Insgected: Management Effectiveness and Security Organization pt-ticularly witn respect to the enange-over of the security force contractor cr. August 27, 198 Results: One apparent violation of the NRC-approved Physical Security Plan was identified in the area of Access Control of Personnel to Vital Area p ga.)R ADOCK 05000277 PNV

_ - _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ .__ . _ _ . _ _ -_- -____ ______ _____ _ _ _ _______

• .

. .

OETAILS Key Persons Contacted Licensee and Contractor Personnel:

• J. Franz, Plant Manager, Peach Bottom Atomic pow 6r Station (PBAPS)

D. Meyers, Support Manager, PBAPS R. Weindorfer, Corporate Director, Nuclear Plant Security

• F. Larkin, Nuclear Security Coordinator, Limerick Generation Station (LGS)

• Berner, Acting Chief Security Coordinator, PBAPS

• J. Devlin, Acting Nuclear Security Coordinator, PBAPS

• Bixier, Corporate Analyst, Nuclear Plant Security

• Supplee, Corporate Analysis, Nuclear Plant Security M. Annast, Senior Vice President, Protection Technology, Inc. (PTI)

• V. Vitale, Vice PresidentrRegional Director, PTI

• C. Brockman, site Manager, PT! U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Persennel:

'T. Johnson, Senior Resident Inspector

• Indicates those present at the exit intervie ine inspectors also interviewed other licensee and contractor security personne . Onsite Follow up of a Non-Routine Event _ Circulating Water Pump Structure Background i

I!!!S It."J'* : a rpNTAlpg 33pgggggg i INT 07.'A;rc t",13 pg ynn pggt;g Ul?.f t 053%. :: ;; p;;M;j g,gy LET I P'. "n:.

i

+.

--

.

.

. .

. 3 Tills Pl.R *GRAP!! CONTA!NS St.FECllARDS liif 02f".T.N '!!3 IE NOT FCD, P!!3UC

.

p+ e % 8s p8r e , II*I 4ne,,;.,

%4, 0I e} k,h4

. ..h re ..v irk p . i y k h 6 4, 6yI1(k l l t'r y p *# p O *.

L(& I 1 , c * 1 I

_NRC Rev'*a

,

t

'

i I

I

.I i

)

1:93 of,: t .' :: :'

a , sie, e, . ' D!)M D5

.

i ;: <. .* .

, p y -a .-.- . n y y.,

.

p. e t .. e*6 .i e e-

• *s. g. ,

4 4

'

s, Y

}' 9 \1*

m - * ,

a

%

.

.

?l115 FW.Pt N Cr.':n;NS S/,FE00 lii. c; ray D ,n"Inr

,7 s, m !s. ,cT; , , .

pp p;m;EDS g

......m, , m a, , ,,

-

. , . .

., ,

l i' i . : .'i" ,

c, NRC_ Findings 7n ' - . s *:. , .-,,.e,,,-.....

5.- , u r. -

,: -

.

,_,,,.,

- .

.

-

<. ,

,

p ..; . n. . . L ,,

... ,,

- t

,.

i

.

.

he irspectors detern r.e: :na u e l':er:se's fa lure : c ;1y attn the ab:ve require er.ts in the NRC-approved Fnysical Security Plan, resulting in three vital area barrier degradations witi, no compensatory action, is an apparent violation of NRC requirements (50-277/83-31-01 and 50-278/88-31-01).

- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - .

-

5 3.0 Change-over of Security Force Contractor On August 27, 1988, at approximately 1800 hours0.0208 days <br />0.5 hours <br />0.00298 weeks <br />6.849e-4 months <br />, the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station (PBAPS) security force contractor changed from Burns International Security Services to Protection Technology, Inc. (PTI).

, Transition teams comprising contractor, PBAPS and Limerick Generating Station (LGS) pcesonnel were assigned to ensure a complete and orderly transitio The inspectors verified that the licensee was in compliance with the NRC-approved Physical Security Plan, Training and Qualificattoa Plan and Contingency Plan during the transition. The inspectors made this determination by reviewing suitability and training records of PTI Security Force Members (SFM's), int,erviewed SFM's on post, observing the PTI 12-hour SFM transition training program and by conducting an inventory of all required response force equipment, q Due to manpower snortage (because of previous attritien and due to the fact that PTI did not rehire all former Burns SFM's) PT! SFM's are working the following hours: watchpersons - 4 twelve hour shif ts followed by 3 days off; security officers - 4 tw d cre hour shif ts followed by 2 days off; and, alarm station aperators - 5 eight hcur sn; ?. N lowed by 2 days of The new securitv iorce contractor plans to continue t'e twelve hour shifts until somet<w in October, 1933, at which time additional SiM's are expected

to have b.en hired, trained, qualified and reao'y to assume duties as SFM's, The ' ,5pectors verified, through a review of post records, that SFM's are

.

%1ng rotated on oost accroximately every two hours. Also, the inspectors

] were informed that the PTI 12-hour SFM transition training program was being attended by SFM's on their scheduled day off. It is also anticipated that SFM's will receive future training and/or retraiaing on their normally scheduled day of The inspectors expressed a concern to the licensee concerning the SFM's ability to remain attentive to d.ty while working 12 hour1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br /> shif ts for a prolonged period of time. The licensee agreed to monitor this situation cl0sel The inspectors noted that the licensee continues to man an excessive nu-ber of ccreensatory costs with SFM's due to ralfunctioning and/or increrable security equipment /systers. The inspectors again expressed a concern to the licensee regarding this issue (See Coroined Inspection Report Nos. 50-277/SS-26 and 50-278/88-26). The licensee stated that the malfunctioning and/or inoperable security equipment / systems were being worked on, however, at the tire of this inspection the "fixes" were not in plac The inspectors observed that werk was being done to el'ninete the need for these cor: e satory post Tne licensee a;ned to ccntirue wcrLing cn tr.e elimination of the Icng-term cc pensat:ry post ..

'

.

o

- .

'

l 4 Exit Interview The inspectors met with the licensee representatives listed in paragraph 1 at the conclusion of the inspection on August 29, 1988. At that time, the purpose and scope of the inspection was reviewed and the findings were presente At no time during the inspection was written material provided to the licensee by the inspectors,

-