IR 05000333/1992025

Physical Security Insp Rept 50-333/92-25 on 921207-25.No Violations or Safety Concerns Noted.Major Areas Inspected: Mgt Support & Aids,Protection & Vital Area Barriers, Detection & Assessment Aids & Emergency Power Supply

ML20126J646
Person / Time
Site:	FitzPatrick
Issue date:	12/21/1992
From:	Keimig R, King E NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
To:
Shared Package
ML20126J628	List: IR 05000333/1992025 ML20126J624
References
50-333-92-25, NUDOCS 9301060241
Download: ML20126J646 (6)

Text

_- -- --- -. - ~ _ _ - - - - _ - . _ - - - . - . _ _ - . . _ . - _ _ _ _

.  !

,

.

.

.

U,- S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

REGION I

Report N /92-25 Docket N :333 1.icense No. QPR-53 Licensee: Power Authority of the State of New York 10 Columbus Circh New YorkmRew York 10019 Facility Name: htnes A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant inspection At: Scriba. New York Inspection Conducted: December 7-10.1992 Type of Inspection: Routine. Announced Physical Security inspector: </sfd /.!/.1//9 k E. B, King, Physical @urity inspector date'

Approved by: / [ ufF - a'-//-9z

/R. R. Kei'migip)def date Safeguards Setlfon  ;

Division of Radiation Safety and Safeguards Areas insnecini: 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 Communication; Emergency Power Supply; Testing, Maintenance and Compensatory Measures; and Security Training and Qualification Resuhs: The licensec's program was directed towards ensuring public health and safety and was in compliance with the NRC requirements in the areas inspected. No safety concerns or violations of regulatory requirements were identified, 9301060241 921221 PDR ADOCK'05000333 G PDR

_ _ _ _ _ . _ _ - _ _ _. _ ._. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - , _ , _ _ _ _ _

_ _ _ _

-

.

.

l

.

DETA11S Fey _ Persons Conindrd Littmte

11. Salmon, Resident hianager

• T. Telfke, Security / Safety hianager a

bl. Colomb, General hianager-Support Services

J.11aley, Security Supervisor

hi. Warchol, Security Training Coordinator

A. Zaremba, Organizational and Licensing Review hianager

G. hiacCammon, Jr., Security Coordinator U. S. Nudear Reguhttory Coiltttihslon

J. Tappert, Resident inspector

Denotes those present at the exit interview The inspector also interviewed other licensee security personnel during this inspectio .0 Mitintgejnent Suppuilltitd.lu.dlls Mitungentent Supl19d hianagement 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 the various aspects of the licensce's program during this inspection as documented in this repor hianagement support for the program was evident by the security program enhancements made since the last routine physical security inspection (50-333/92-10) primarily:

-

the completion of a major perimeter upgrade to include the installation of additional assessment aids, repositioning of the protected area (PA) barrier and the repositioning of the intrusion detection system (IDS); and

-

the instrumentation and controls (I&C) technicians received formalized classroom training, by the manufacturer. on the newly installed assessment i aids;

- - _ - _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ - -

-

.

,

3 Altdits The inspector reviewed the licensee's annual Qaality Assurance Audit (No. 775)

of the security program, which was conducted from May 4 29, 1992. The

. inspector verified that the audit had been planned and carried out in accordance l with the NRC-approved physical security plan (the Plan). During the audit, no adverse findings were identified but fifteen recommendations were made as enhancements to the operation and administration of the security program. The recommendations 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 consultant with nuclear security expertise. The inspector determined, by a review of the licensec's responses to the recommendations, that actions were taken on the recommendations to enhance the effectiveness of the program further. No deficiencies were noted by the inspecto .0 Prutreted.mmLY11al Area Pitysical thirrier. DetrtthiutritLAssrssment Aids lillittrkt The inspector conducted a physical inspection of the PA barrier on December 8, 1992. The inspector dctermined by observation that the barrier was installed and maintained as described in the Plan. No deficiencies were note .2 11 Detection Aids The inspector observed the perimeter detection aids on December 8,1992, and determined that they were installed, maintained and operated as committed to in -

the Plan. The inspector observed licensee testing of sixteen intrusion detection system zones at twenty three locations. All test results were satisfactory with no adjustments required. No deficiencies were note .3 PA and Isolat]sm Zone IJgitt}mg The inspector conducted a PA and isolation zone lighting survey on December 9, 1992, from approximately 4:45 p.m. to 5:45 p.m., accompanied by a licensee security supervisor. The inspector determined by observation and by the use of the licensee's calibrated light meter that the station's lighting system was very effective _ and that the isolation zones were adequately maintained _ to permit observation of activities on both sides of the PA barrier. No deficiencies were pote _

_ .-- - _ _ _ _ _ _ . , . _ _ . , _ . . , _ _ _

_ _ ___. _ _ __ _ .__ _ _.. _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

.

,

4 Annsmaillkis 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. No deficiencies were note ! Ylintonn (VA) linrriers The inspector conducted a physical inspection of selected VA barriers on December 9,1992. The inspector determined by observation that the VA barriers-were installed and maintained as described in the Plan. No denciencies were note ;

' h91rtial nnd VilnLArrasaccess Control or Personarlltdatecutml Vehicles hnstntLAttbLContral 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:

4.1.1 The inspector verined that personnel were properly identined and authorization was checked prior to issuance of badges and key cards. No

'

denciencies were noted, i 4.1.2 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 Pla The inspector observed both plant and visitor personnel access processing during peak and off peak traffic periods on December 9 and 10,1992. The inspector also interviewed members of the security force and licensee security staff about personnel access procedures. No deficiencies were note .1.3 The inspector determined, by observation, that individuals in the PA and VAs displayed their badges as required. No deficiencies were note .1.4 The inspector verined that the licensee had escort procedures for visitors-into the PA and VAs. No deficiencies were note .1.5 -The licensee had a mechanism for expediting access to the vital equipment during emergencies and that mechanism was adequate for its purpose. No deficiencies were note _ _

.;_=

-

.,

.

5 l' adage and MaterInl Access Contnd The inspector determined that the licensee was exercising positive control over packages and materials that were brought into the PA through the warehouse and main access portal. The inspector reviewed the package and material control procedures and found that they were consistent with commitments in the Pla The inspector also observed package and material processing and interviewed members of the security force and the licensee's security staff about package and material control procedures. No deficiencies were note .3 Ydicle Access Control The inspector determined that the licensee properly controls vehicle access to the PA. The inspector determined that vehicles were properly authorized prior to being allowed to enter the PA, with identification verined by a security force member (SFM). The inspector also reviewed the vehicle search procedures and observed that at least two SFMs control vehicle access at the main vehicle access portal. These procedures were consistent with the commitments in the Plan. On December 8 and 9,1992, the inspector observed vehicle scarches and interviewed members of the security force and the licensee's security staff about vehicle search procedures. No denciencies were note .0 Alann stittions and Conttitunk2ttimts The inspector observed tLe operations in the Central Alarm Station (CAS) and Secondary Alarm Station (SAS) and determined they were maintained and 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 verined that the CAS and SAS did not require any operational activities that would interfere with the assessment and response functions. The inspector verified -that the licensee had communications with local law enforcement agencies as committed to in the Plan. No denciencies were note .0 Emergency Power Supph The inspector verified that there are several systems (batteries, dedicated diesel generator within a VA, and plant on-site power) that provide backup power to the security system The inspector reviewed the test and maintenance records and procedures for these systems and found that they were consistent with the Pla On December 7,1992, the inspector reviewed the circumstances surrounding the loss o power to the station's security enmputer that occurred on June 23,1992. The inspector reviewed Licensee Event Report (LER) # 92-034-00 and determined that all of the

~

..

~

.

..

affe reas were properly compensated and that the licensee nad effectively lmpF ented the proper corrective actions. No deficiencies were note .0 Tnthigdjahttennnee nnd Compensntory Mensures Ti e, inspec c ='

that the licensee was conducting testing and maintaining security syer . - 't as committed to in the Plan. This determination was tv. ed upon r to t records for security equipment. The station provides

.- ' technicians % re; cifically assigned to maintain security equipment. A review Sese records indiv' sairs are being completed in a timely manner and that a pncritiratinn sched ' signed to each work request. The inspector also reviewed the use of compenmy. . x . es>

and security force overtime and found them to be m:. 9al, hrgely due m t. - . forts and prompt response of the maintenance group. No ,

deur.:ncies were notc .0 Securit v Intinirig.amLQtiallriention The inspector randomly selected and reviewed training and qualification records for eight SFMs. The physical qualification and firearms requalifications records were inspected for armed and unarmed SFMs and security supervisors. The inspector determined that the training had been conducted in accordt .vith the security training and - ?]ification

'

(T&Q) plan and that it was properly docm.wiac 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 professional .9nd knowledgeable of the job requirements. No deficiencies were note .0 Exit Interview

The inspector met with the licensce's representatives-indicated in Paragraph 1.0 at the

_

conclusion of the inspection of December 10,1992. At that time, the purpose and scope of the inspection were reviewed, and the findings were presented.

l l

l

!.

_ . _ _ _ - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . - _ . - - - - _ _ _____.---__-..._a_-