IR 05000286/1993021
| ML20057C239 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Indian Point  |
| Issue date: | 09/17/1993 |
| From: | Keimig R, King E NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19063E095 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-286-93-21, NUDOCS 9309280115 | |
| Download: ML20057C239 (7) | |
Text
i
.
.
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION I
Report No.
50-286/93-21 Docket No.
50-286
.
License No. PPR-64 Licensee:
Power Authority of the State of New York P.O. Box 215 Buchanan. New York 10511 Facility Name:
Indian Point 3 Nuclear Power Plant Inspection At:
Buchanan. New York Inspection Conducted: August 30 - September 2.1993 Inspector:
44u/ 4
/
9 //7/43 E. B. King, Physical @ty Inspector
'daie Approved by:
8/4 of 9/// [4.$
.'R. 'KeimigMief, Safeguards Section
' date Division of Radiation Safety and Safeguards
& is Inspected: Licensee Actions on Previously Identified Fitness-for-Duty (FFD) Items;-
Management Support.and Audits; Protected and Vital Area Physical Barriers, Detection and Assessment Aids; Protected and Vital Area Access Control of Personnel, Packages and Vehicles; Alarm Stations and Communications; Testing, Maintenance and Compensatory Measures; and Security Training and Qualification.
Results: The program is directed toward public health and safety. The licensee was found to be in compliance with the NRC requirements in the areas inspected. Security program upgrades and enhancements continue to be made and management attention to the program was evident.
9309280215 930922 PDR ADOCK 05000286 G
-
.
.
.
.
DETAILS 1.0 Key Persons Contac1El 1.1 Licensee
- J. Garrity, Resident Manager
'
- M. Peckham, General Manager, Operations
- C. Bergeron, General Manager, Maintenance
- J. Maurer, General Manager, Site Support -
- J. Hahn, Security Manager, White Plains Office
-
- J. Fitzsimmons, Security Manager J. Odendahl, Instrumentation & Control (I&C) Manager
-
- J. Moser, Security Administration Coordinator
- M. Leonard, Security Supervisor
- T. Weber, Security Support Coordinator
- J. Cherubini, Security Coordinator
- T. Watson, Security Sergeant
- D. O'Brien, Technical Licensing Coordinator
- R. Hansler, Training Manager
- M. Kyer, Training Support Supervisor
- K. Payne, Jr., I&C Supervisor
- S. Manzione, I&C Engineer
,
i 1.2 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
- B. Westreich, Resident Inspector
- denotes those present at the exit interview The inspector also interviewed other licensee security personnel during this inspection.
2.0 Followup of Previously Identified Fitness-for-Duty (FFD) Items
.
2.1 (Closed) VIO 50-286/92-24-01: Failure to obtain medical assurance of an individual's fitness to adequately perform activities before permitting the individual to return to duty.
During previous inspection 50-286/92-24, the inspectors determined that the licensee failed to obtain medical assurance of an individual's fitness to adequately perform activities before permitting the individual to return to duty as required by 10 CFR 26.27(b)(2). Based on a review of the licensee's corrective action, which included revision of FFD procedure 1.0, Revision 6, Section 7.8.6, titled
" Reinstatement Following A Confirmed Positive Test," and discussions with
.
e
r
.
.
-
.
,
licensee management, the inspector determined that the corrective action satisfied the intent of the rule. The licensee advised the inspector that there had been no confirmed positive drug tests since the procedure was revised. However, for two individuals with confirmed positive alcohol tests, the licensee, in addition to meeting all regulatory requirements, tested the individuals and determined them not to be positive for drugs prior to returning them to duty.
2.2 (Closed) VIO 50-286/92-24-02: Failure to establish a follow-up FFD testing program.
During previous inspection 50-286/92-24, the inspectors determined that the
,
licensee failed to establish a follow-up testing program as required by 10 CFR 26.24(a)(4) and.27(b)(2). Based on the licensee's corrective actions, which included the revision of FFD procedure 1.0, Revision 6, Section 7.8.6, titled
" Reinstatement Following A Confirmed Positive Test," the inspector's review of a new tracking system developed to ensure follow-up tests are completed, and discussions with licensee management as described above, the inspector determined that the corrective actions satisfied the intent of the rule.
3.0 Management Support and Audits _
3.1 Management Supoort Management support for the licensee's physical security program was determined to be consistent with program needs. This determination was based upon the inspector's review of various aspects of the licensee's program during this
,
'
inspection, as documented in this report.
Since the last physical security
<
inspection, conducted in January 1993, the licensee completed a major security upgrade along the riverfront, installed a new security access management system that provides historical data from the on-line security system, and added software features to the alarm station computers to reduce compensatory measures and improve alarm assessment capabilities. These modifications indicate management attention in maintaining an effective program.
3.2 Audits The inspector reviewed the report of the licensee's annual Quality Assurance Audit of the security program, No. 93-05, which was conducted from February 17 - March 12,1993. The inspector verified that the audit had been planned and carried out in accordance with the Physical Security Plan (the Plan). During the audit, ten corrective action requests (CARS) and eight recommendations were written. The inspector reviewed the CARS and recommendations and concluded j
,
L.
..
they were not indicative of programmatic weaknesses. The audit' was very comprehensive in scope and the results were reported to the appropriate level of management. The audit team included a technical advisor with nuclear security expertise. The inspector determined, by a review of the corrective actions taken in response to the CARS, that the identified concerns were adequately addressed.
No deficiencies were noted by the inspector.
4.0 Protected and Vital Area Physical Barrier. Detection and Assessment Aids 4.1 Protected Area Barrier The inspector conducted a physical inspection of the protected area (PA) barrier on August 30,1993. The inspector determined by observation that the barrier -
was installed and maintained as described in the Plan.
4.2 Protected Area Detection Aids The inspector observed the perimeter detection aids on August 30,1993, and determined that they were installed and maintained as committed to in the Plan.
On September 1,1993, the inspector observed licensee testing of 18 intrusion detection system zones, at 26 locations. One zone tested unsatisfactorily. The inspector verified that the zone tested satisfactorily during the previous periodic functional test. The licensee implemented immediate corrective actions, which included the establishment of compensatory measures in the area. Repair and retesting of the detection device was completed within 30 minutes of the time of l
discovery. Retesting was satisfactory.
j
'
4.3 Protected Area and Isolation Zone Lighting The inspector conducted a PA and isolation zone lighting survey on
August 31, 1993, from approximately 8:00 to 9:15 p.m., accompanied by a licensee security supervisor. The inspector determined by observation and use -
j of a calibrated light meter provided by the licensee that the station's lighting
system' met regulatory requirements and was very effective, and that the isolation j
zones were adequately maintained to permit observation of activities on both sides j
of the PA barrier.
I-1 4.4 Assessment Aids l
l The inspector observed the PA perimeter assessment aids during day and night
{
periods and determined that they were installed, maintained and operated as
!
committed to in the Plan. The inspector also noted that the completion of the i
riverfront upgrade has significantly improved assessment capability along the riverfront.
!
~
.,
,
-.. -
-. -,
--.
-.
.
-.
-
.. - _, _ _.
.
-
.--
.
-
!
~
)
.
.
'
4.5 Vital Area Barriers The inspector conducted a physical inspection of selected vital area (VA) barriers on August 31, 1993. The inspector determined by observation that the VA barriers were installed and maintained as described in the Plan.
l 4.6 Vital Area Detection Aids The inspector observed licensee testing of selected VA detection aids on September 1,1993, from approximately 12:00 p.m. - 1:30 p.m. and determined that they were installed, maintained and operated as committed to in the Plan.
In summary, the licensee's PA and VA physical barriers, detection, and assessment aids satisfied NRC requirements.
5.0 Protected and Vital Areas Access Control of Personnel. Packanes and Vehicles 5.1 Personnel Access Control The inspector determined that the licensee was exercising positive control over personnel access to the PA and VAs. This determination was based on the following:
5.1.1. The inspector verified that personnel were properly identified and authorization was checked prior to issuance of badges and key cards.
5.1.2 The inspector verified that the licensee was implementing a search program for firearms, explosives, incendiary devices and other unauthorized materials as committed to in the Plan.
The inspector observed both plant and visitor personnel access processing during peak and off-peak traffic periods on August 31 and September 1,1993. The inspector also interviewed members of the security force and licensee i
security staff about personnel access procedures and determined they were knowledgeable of the requirements.
5.1.3 The inspector determined, by observation, that individuals in the PA and
.
VAs displayed their badges as required.
5.1.4 The inspector verified that the licensee maintained and followed escort procedures for visitors into the PA and VAs.
.
.
-
-
-
.
.
.
.
.
_
_ _
.
.
n
.
.
!
5.2 Package and Material Access Control
,
The inspector determined that the licensee was exercising positive control over
packages and materials that were brought into the PA through 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 interviewed members of the i
security force and the licensee's security staff about package and material control
procedures. The inspector determined that the security force members (SFMs)
j were performing package and material processing consistent with security l
procedures and that they were knowledgeable of the requirements.
5.3 Vehicle Access Control i
The inspector determined that the licensee properly controlled vehicle access to l
and within the PA. The inspector verified that vehicles were properly authorized
!
prior to being allowed to enter the PA. Identification was verified by a SFM at the main access portal. The procedure was consistent with the commitments in
'
the Plan.
The inspector also reviewed the vehicle search procedures and determined that they were consistent with commitments in the Plan.
The inspector determined tnat at least two SFMs control vehicle access at the main vehicle access portal. On August 30 and September 2,1993, the inspector
,
!
observed vehicle searches and interviewed members of the security force and the licensee's security staff about vehicle search procedures.
The inspector determined that SFMs were performing vehicle searches consistent with security
procedures and that they were knowledgeable of the requirements.
In summary, the licensee had effective programs which satisfied NRC requirements for PA and VA access control of personnel, packages, and vehicles.
,
6.0 Alarm Stations and Communications
,
'
The inspector observed the operations in the Central Alarm Station (CAS) and Secondary
Alarm Station (SAS) and determined they were operated as committed to in the Plan.
CAS and SAS operators were interviewed by the inspector and found to be
{
knowledgeable of their duties and responsibilities. The inspector verified that the CAS and SAS did not require any operational activities that would interfere with the
!
assessment and response functions. The inspector also verified that the licensee had
communications with local law enforcement agencies as committed to in the Plan. No i
deficiencies were noted.
,
s i
i a
-
n
7-
--
.
.
,
'
7.0 Testing. Maintenance and Compensatory Measures
,
The inspector dete N that the licensee was conducting tests and maintaining security systems and equipment as committed to in the Plan. This determination was based upon a review of the test records for the equipment.
The station provides I&C technicians who are specifically assigned to maintain security.
'
equipment. A review of corrective maintenance records indicated repairs were being
'
accomplished in a timely and effective manner. The inspector also reviewed the use of compensatory measures and security force overtime and found them to be minimal, largely due to the efforts and prompt response of the security maintenance group.
Additionally, based on discussions with licensee management, the licensee plans to provide training, by the equipment manufacturers, to I&C technicians who work on security systems to increase the effectiveness of the maintenance program.
No deficiencies were noted.
8.0 Security Training and Oualification On August 31,1993, from approximately 9:00 to 11:30 a.m., the inspector observed a portion of the firearms requalification training program. Based on observations at the range and discussions with the training staff, the inspector determined that the requalification requirements, as approved by the NRC, were being satisfied and the range t
was being controlled in a safe manner.
'
Additionally, the inspector reviewed the progress being made on the development of the licensee's tactical response program. The licensee obtained the services of a consultant to assist in the development of the licensee's protective strategies. Based on observations which included the location of choke points, defensive positions and barriers, tactical response firearms training and discussions with licensee management, the program appears to be effective.
Several SFMs were interviewed to determine if they possessed the requisite knowledge to carry out their assigned duties. The interview results indicated that they were
knowledgeable of theirjob requirements. No deficiencies were noted.
-,
9.0 Exit Interview The inspector met with the licensee's representatives indicated in Paragraph 1.0 at the conclusion of the inspection of September 2,1993. At that time, the purpose and scope of the inspection were reviewed, and the findings were presented. The licensee
{
acknowledged the inspection findings.
l
<
-