IR 05000293/1990016
| ML20056A486 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Pilgrim |
| Issue date: | 07/30/1990 |
| From: | Dexter T, Keimig R, Limroth D NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20056A481 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-293-90-16, NUDOCS 9008080019 | |
| Download: ML20056A486 (8) | |
Text
yv "( f
- q y
,
p ra.",i m to M tj b 4 m.
"
g.,
W
.a. 4 ).
,
V j g'&&4,
' gjl fftoy w.
- p::ps)
S c: n.~F 4
,,_.. a o
,
l$dh.
e 1$$250
-
E$
'
%: tow.stwt M)
ptJE)
'
U. S; NVCLEAR REGULATORY ~ COMMISSION
'
f"
REGION I
i.
,
t I
if
.
'
$
)Rsport No,t;50-293/00-16
@9 Docke't 'No.
50-293
?
p [:
l License No, OPR-35
~
\\
ticensee: LBoston Edison Company-800 Boylston Street a
Boston, Massachusetts 02199
,
..
Facility Name:. Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station y
?
Inspection At: Plymouth, Massachusetts q;
Inspection' Conducted: June 25-29,'1990
,
Inspectohs:.
&
7./8 90 i
Physical Security 9,5pector
' date
^
T. C6e r
.
(
n,,
~
D. F LinfFfth, Sr. Reactor Engineer,
'[8'N Of2%M n'
.
.date
.Physii:al Security g "
.s
%g'
n ht
'
i
s i
p
'
-
'
-R'/R. Kalmig, Chief, Safe ds Sectiort
'7-Jd-2p_..
y n
. Approved byi
/
date
8tvisionof; Radiation.Sa and Safeguards; f
,
'
g t
Inspection Summary: Routine, (>nannowced Physical Secur:ity Inspection
,l on JuneT. S.29, WO (Rec _o_r.t. No. 5.0-2H. NO.-16)~
~
'
_
,y
,
af Areas Insqa, ctg;h Management Support,and Program Plans; Protected and Vital
'
dth
.7
~ Area Physical -Barriers, Vetection and Assessment Aids; Protecteti and Vital
% l'
Area' Access Control o' Personnel and Packages; Alarm Stations and
%*
! Communications; Power Supplies; Testing, Maintenance and Compensatory
'
Measures;' and. Personnel T raining and Qualifications; Security. Locks, and j
'
4, follow-up'on previously identified. items.
1 Resul ts: The licensee was.in compHance with NP.C requirements in the areas examined.. However; potential problen,' re.c.uirint; licensee attintion, we4
<
noted'witm assessment aids, personr.ol qualification records and housekeeping i'i
<
,
, practices,
%
i; 9008080019 900N 6
^
'
\\
ppR ADOCK 05000 @
33:
>
y pu.
.
O e
s U
m a Is (
,
,
m-
.
,
,
.
.
.... _............ _
_ _ _ _ _ _
.
.
B k
DETAILS Ke1 ersons Contacted P
1.
L_icensee
- E. Kraft, Acting Plant Manager E
"D. Long, Plant Services Department Manager
- J. Neal, Security Dperation Manager
- R. Deacy, Security Operation Manager
- T. Nicholson, Security Administration Division Manag.
- B. Cobb, Maintenance /l&C Technician
- P. Hamilton, Compliance Division Manager
- L. Simons, Quality Engineering Division Manager
- R. Swanson, Regulatory Affairs Department Manager
- W. Manro, Senior Compliance Engineer R. Andrews, Security Engineer R. Hird, Access Author'Zation Supervisor USNRC
'J. Macdonald, Senior Res' dent Inspector C. Carpenter, Resident Inspector
- denotes those present at exit interview The inspectors also interviewed other licensee and contractor security personnel.
2.
Fol., low up_of Previously_ident_ified items a.
(Closed) Inspector ollow-up Item (IFI) 50-293/90-03-01:
During c
inspection 90-03, the inspectors noted that one perirreter intrusion detect alarm zone did not reset even though the zone was cleared.
At the time, the licensee agreed to research the root cause of the problert and takr corrective action.
During this inspection, the inspectors observtd numerous alarms being generated and determined by observation that all alarms reset as required.
b.
(Closed) Inspector follow-up Item (IFI) 50-293/90-03-02:
During ir.spection 90-03, the inspectors noted that assessment aids required frequent maintenance to maintain their effectiveness.
Three were replaced or repaired +Jring that inspection.
Another three had other problems that needed to be resolved.
During thi s inspection, similar problems were identified again.
Foi record purposes, this Ifl is l
closed and the matter will be carried as an unresolvea item.
(See Paragraph 4.e).
'
!
.
$
<'
-. =
-,.
'
M
,
..
(
.
.
.
.
'
'
.
-
. /Y
- -
f
- g N-[
'
-,
-.__
.____._.
..
._
_
.
.
c.
(Closed) inspector Follow up Item (IFI) 50-293/90-03-03:
During inspection 90-03, the inspectors noted that a Secondary Alarm Station (SAS) operatt was not knowledgeable of alarm station override procedures.
During this inspection, the inspectors determined, by 4:tecviewing alarm station operators and reviewing training records, that to. licensee had conducted training of Central Alarm Station (fAS) and S.'S operators on t9e oserride procedures.
No deficiencies were anted.
3.
Management Support and_ Security Program Plans Management Support - Management support for the licensee's physical a.
security program was determined to be adequate by the inspectors.
This determination was based upon the inspectors' review of various aspects of the licensee's program during this inspection, as documented in this report.
During this it.spection, the inspectors interviewed several of the contract security force members.
During the courst of the interviots, the inspectors perceived that the security force members were dissatisfied, in certain respects, with the contractor's site managenent.
The inspectors brought this perception to the attention of the licensee's security manager who agreed to look into the natter ana take corrective action as appropriate.
This item will be reviewed during subsequent inspections.
b.
Sec u r i ty_rProgram Plans - The inspectors verified that changes +a the licensee s NRC-approved Security, Contingency, and Training anj Qualification Plans, as implemented, did not decrease the ef fectiveness of the respective plans, and had been submitter, in accordance with NRC requirements.
4.
Protected Area Physical Barriers, Detection and Assessment Aids
. Protected Area (pal Barrier - The inspectors conducted a physical a.
inspection of the PA barrier on June 26 and 27,1990.
The inspectors determined, by observation, that the barrier was installed and maintained as described in the Plan.
No deficiencies were noted, b.
Protected Area Detection Aids - The inspectors observed tN: testing of PA perimeter intrusion detection aids or June 26, 1990, and determined that they were installed, maintained and operated as i
committed to in the plan. No deficiencies were noted.
I f
C lsolation Zones - The inspectors verified that the perimeter isclation zones were adequately maintained to permit observation of j
activities on both sides of the PA barrier.
No deficiencies were
}
noted.
j i
!
t
~
^
je
.
b
- ;
,;,.~
M%M)
- ~ ' F 7
'. ; ' y ; . ' *
_
.
_ _ _ _ _ _
- - - - - -... -
.
_. -
'
L
'
,
.
. '
'
..-
.
,3
.
<
.
d.
Protected Area and-Isolation Zone Lighting - The inspectors
.donducted a lighting survey of tl1 ETA and isolation zones on
' June 27, 1990. The inspectors determined by observation that
._ lighting in.the PA.and isolation zones was adequate. No.
~
- deficiencies were noted.
,
, p; hsessment' Aids - The inspectors observed the PA perimeter assessment
,l.,
e,
aids and determined that they were generally installed, maintained U
and operated as ~conitted to in the Plan.
,
%}}$ P G]SP M ll CO E kl!l3.bkfEO N S ' - laygrc,I!Dil DiD li HDI IBil Pl51IC msti.tSSE,1115 lESTlWAllY LEFTBlAM.
.. , r.
l The licensee committed to review this matter and develop corrective actions that will restore the assessment aids.tontheir original.
performance capability.
This is an Unresolved Item pending the , NRC's review of the licensee's corrective actions (UNR 50-293/- 90-16-01).
e .,. 'v, f.
-Vital Area (V'A) Barriers - The inspectors conducted a physi:al inspection of several VA barriers on June 26, 27, and 28,- 1990.
The inspectors determined, oy observation, that tae barriers were ! installed and maintained as committed to in the Plan.
No deficiencies were noted.
. . .- _ ..p ( -
F j ' ' , , , Y ln ' * , , , c .) , ' ' ,e &
l: . g y _ _ , j; - g.
Protected and Vital Area Access Control of Personnel and Packages L a, Personnel Access _ Control - The inspectors observed access control into the PA/VAs,on' June 26, 27, and 28, 1990, and _ ' , determined that the licensee was exercising positive control'. This determination was based on the following: (1) The inspectors verified that personnel are properly identified , and authorization is checked prior to issuance of badges and ' key-cards.
No def_iciencies were noted. On the morning of- ' June 26, 1990, the inspectors had the opportunity to observe the , y ' itcensee implement a 100 percent hands-on search of all personnel entering the facility due to an equipment outage in ~ the access-control facility.
It was noted that all plant . employees cooperated with the security off;cers.
It was ) apparent-to the inspectors that plant personnel understand and respect the security program.
No deficiencies were noted.
^ (2) The inspectors verified that the 1icensee has a program to confirm the trustworthiness and reliability of employees and contractor personnel.
This program includes psychological ' . examinations and checks on employment, credit and criminal history.
The records maintained in this area were neat, easy to review and the required information was well documented..No deficiencies were noted.
(3) The inspectors reviewed the security-lock and key program and determined by observation that the program was consistent with
commitments in the Plan. No deficiencies were noted.
(4) The inspectcrs verified that the licensee takes precautions to ensure that an unauthorized name cannot be added to the PA access list.by having a member of. management review the list every:31 days.
No deficiencies were noted.
' (5), The inspectors verified that the licensee has a search program, ~ as committed to in the Plan, for firearms, explosives, incendiary devices and other unauthorized materials.
The inspectors = observed personnel access processing during shift changes, visitor access processing, and interviewed members of the security force and the licensee's security staff about personnel access procedures.
No deficiencies were noted.
' (6) The inspectors determined by observation that individuals in.
.
, the PA and VAs display their badges as required. No i deficiencies were noted, f (7) The inspectors verified that the licensee has escort procedures W for visitors into the PA and VAs.
No deficiencies were noted.
L- ' l.
,, . , - "V<
. , . . m -. s.* '
(8) -The inspectors ver!fied that unesc F ed access to VAs-.is limited to authorized individuals, fhe access list is revalidated at least once every 31 days as committed to in the Plan, No deficiencies were noted, b.
- Package _ and Material Access Control - The inspectors determined that
< - -the licensee was exercising -positive control over packages and material that are brought into the PA at the main access' center and the central' warehouse. The inspectors observed package-and material processing and interviewed-SFMs about package and material control.
No deficiencies.were noted.
5.
Alarm Stations and Communications The t'nspectors observed the operations in the CAS and determined that the station was maintained and operated as committed to in the Plan. Alarm station. operators interviewed by the inspectors were found to be knowledgeable _of their duties and responsibilities.
The inspectors . verified that_the CAS operators do not have any operaU onal activities that.would interfere with.their assessment and response Nnctions.
The inspectors also verified that the licensee has communicaties with Iccal
law enforcement agencies as committed to in the Plan.
No deficiencies were noted.
6.
Power Supply The inspectors -verified that-there are several systems (batteries, dedicated diesel generator, and plant on-site.AC power) that provide . backup power.to the security systems, At least one of the trackup power supplies ~is located in a vital area.
During the inspection _of the security emergency-diesel gererator, the inspectors noted standing fuel oil on the floor,.an oil scaked piece of ~ cardboard on the floor, oil standing in the sump and the absence of '!No ,- L Smoking" signs, it appeared to the inspectors that this condition was a result of. poor housekeeping and presented a hazard to the operation of the security diesel.
The deficient conditions were brought to the attention of the licensee and they were immediately corrected.
7.
Testing, Maintenance and Compensatory Measures The inspectors reviewed the testing and maintenance records and confirmed' that the records committed to in the Plan were on file an:: readily available for licensee and NRC review, The station provides instrumentation and controls (l&C) technicians to conduct preventive and corrective maintenance on security-equipment.
However, the inspectors determined from a review of work crders on file at the security operations office and through discussions with SFMs that the maintenance of security systems and equipment was not timely. Some work > orders'were noted to'b nore than two months old and it appeared that no ef fort had been initiated to resolve this proble,
g.
, e (,.
e . iV Discussions ~with security and plant management de".ormined that part of.the problem was the low priority Security assigned to some of the work orders J and the limited number of I&C techn.icians'available.to support the . security work.
The licensee was aware of the limited number of I&C. technicians and had
committed previously to the NRC that more technicians would be obtained.
,
- The-licensee restated this commitment and, at the time of this.inipection, was actively seeking additional 1&C technicians.
The licensee'further committed to improve the preventive and corrective maintenance program for security equipment, This item will be reviewed during subsequent - inspections.
. The inspectors also reviewed the licensee's use of compensatory measures.
and determined them to be as committed to in the Plan. No deficiencies- ' were noted.
8.
Security Training and Qualification The inspectors randomly. selected and reviewed the training and qualification ' records for 14 SFMs.
Physical cualifications and firearms qualifications records were also inspected. These records were for armed, unarmed and supervisory personnel.
The inspectors determined that training had Nen conducted in accordance with the security program plans, and that'it was-properly documented. No deficiencies were noted.
Ii Several SFMs:were interviewed to determine if they possessed the requisite knowledge and ability to carry out their' assigned duties. The interview results indicated that they.were knowledgeable and professjonal in performing their job requirements. = No deficiencies were roted.
The inspectors ubserved the licensee conduct a contingency drill on June 28, 1990.
SFMs used c ver and concealment ef fectively and complied with ' the contingency plan commitments.
A critique of the drill was conducted immediately t'ollowing the end of the scenario.
No deficiencies were noted.
,Also on June 28, 1990, the inspectors # eved several members of the ,; security force undergoing their annuai eapons qualification.
The firir,g range war. supervised in a professiona manner, range-safety was always paramount, and personnel were obserr J to follow the weapons qualification posith ns described in the lesson plans as required.
No deficiencies
were noted.
On June 27, 1990, during the review of the physical qualifications'and.
.edical records, the inspectors could not find any of tne charts er graphs .of the vision and hearing tests.
The only document? tion of the vision and hearing tests was a letter with the examiner's signature attesting that the individual was certified to perform security force duties. The inspectors interviewed several security force me.oers and determined f rom ... ...,..
g y Nu.< % . -. M . . 'a -
, ._ I ' their description of the vision examination that the exam was completed properly and includec a proper examination for glaucoma.
The licerisee was able to obtain the hearing charts for the !nsoectors to examine on June 28, 1990.
The licensee committed to having 1he completed chart or . graph on each individual returned with the comple.ed physical in the i
future. The vision and hearing test documentatiot files will be reviewed during subsequent inspections to insure an auditable record is available.
$ a 9.
Exit Interview u dE The inspectors met with the licensee's representativ!s indicated in paragraph 1 at the conclusion of the inspectior: on Jure 29, 1990.
At g that time, the rinpose and scope of the inspection were reviened and the
findings were pruented.
The licer see's commitments, as docuaented in ' this report, were reviewed and cont irmed with the licer:see.
M i _ l ., g-l
i6 d_ m . - x h .
. , i , . }}