IR 05000334/1987003

Physical Protection & Preoperational Security Program Insp Repts 50-334/87-03 & 50-412/87-05,respectively,on 870126-30. No Violations Noted.Major Area Inspected:Quality of Training Program for Security Personnel & Status of Implementation

ML20205T053
Person / Time
Site:	Beaver Valley
Issue date:	03/31/1987
From:	Bailey R, Keimig R, Martin W, Galen Smith NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
To:
Shared Package
ML20205T035	List: IR 05000334/1987003 ML20205T030
References
50-334-87-03, 50-334-87-3, 50-412-87-05, 50-412-87-5, NUDOCS 8704070201
Download: ML20205T053 (5)

Text

_ _ _ _ --

,

!

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

REGION I

Report N d-334/87-03 *

50-412/87-05 Docket N License No.. OPR-66 CFPR-105 Licensee: Duquesne Light Company __

435 Sixth Avenue Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania Facility Name: Beaver Valley Power Station Units 1 and 2 Inspection At: Shippingport, Pennsylvania Inspection Conducted: January 26-30, 1987 t

Date of Last ;yica l Security Inspection: October 15-17, 1986 Inspectors: l \ __ .

_

3 -f o -g7

' C Smith, S feg ( ds Specialist date d* 3/-f 7 l[.J. a117 ysical cate J ZA [ p curity Inspector

. .' Martin, Physical Security Inspector gpa/c te Approved by: .c ,__ J. .u // Keimig, guards Section, date

,

inspection Summary: Routine Physical Protection Inspection of Unit 1 and a Preoperational~lecurity Program ~ Review ollnit 27 Report Nos @U3T/67-0T anF56-4T2787 65)

Areas Inspected:

Unit _1: The quality of the training program for security personnel and the ability to carry out their assigned duties. The inspection consisted of:

reexaminations of a statistically selected sample of security personnel in qualification /requalification tasks; observations of examination administra-tion; interviews of security personnol; and review and evaluation of examina-tion result PDR ADOCK 05000334 0 PDR

{ .

'

Unit 2 Status of security program implementatio ,

Results:

Unit 1 The inspectors determined that security personnel are sufficiently knowledge-able to carry out their assigned dutie Unit 2 The inspectors determined that the final security plan combining the Unit 1 and Unit 2 security programs had not been submitted and installation of Unit 2 security systems, equipment and hardware was not complete.

I i

(

.

DETAILS 1. Key Persons Contacted F. Lipchick, Licensing Supervisor, OLC H. Harper, Director of Security DLC T. Zog1mann, Senior Licensing Project Engineer, DLC M. Ziemba, Startup Engineer, DLC A. Bauer, Startup Engineer, DLC 0. White, Startup Engineer, DLC A. Middleton, Security Assistant, DLC M. Johnston, Security Procedures and Training Coordinator G. Miller, District Manager, Security Bureau, In D. Tammaro, Chief Security Trainer, Security Bureau, In J. Gagliano, Security Startup Test Coordinator, Security Bureau, In . Training and Qualification Program - Unit 1 The objective of this inspection was to have the licensee demonstrate that individuals in the security force are trained to perform the security related tasks to which they are assigned as described in the ifcensee's security, contingency, and training and qualification plan The inspectors requested the licensee to test a statistical sample of security force members in the tasks for which they were previously qual-ified. The individuals who were to be tested were randomly selected by the inspectors from the roster of personnel qualified in each of four job categories: Watchperson/ Guard; Access Controllers; Alarm Station Opera-tors; and Armed Responder The testing did not include firearms gi.ali-fication at this time. Three hundred and twenty-eight examinations were administered by the licensee and monitored, on a random basis, by the inspectors. The inspectors also reviewcd and evaluated the examination results, o r, am Te s ti ng_P,r_cg The following is a description of the testing program requested by the inspectors and administered by the licensee for the four job categorie (1) Watchperson/ Guard Sixteen basic tasks with specific written tests are used by the 11ccnsee to qualify individuals for entry into the security force as watchperson The number of questions on each task test varies. One hundred and fifty-five individuals were ran-domly selected from one hundred and sixty-two available for testing. A total of 261 tests were administered to these in-dividuals by the licensee. A test failure was assumed if at least one question on the test was missed. Thirteen individuals failed a total of fourteen tests. Seven of the failures occurred on the same tes .

The licensee was requested to review the test and the training for the represented task by June 1, 198 .

This will be reviewed during a subsequent inspectio '

,

,

(2) Access Controllers Nine tasks with specific written tests, in addition to those in paragraph (1), are used by the licensee to qualify individuals

'

for this job category. Thirteen individuals were randomly selected from fifteen available for testing. A total of twerity-five tests were administered to these individuals by the licensee. There were no failure (3) Alarm Station Operators Nine of sixteen individuals available for testing in this category were randomly selected by the inspectors and tested by the licensee in the written test associated with this job category. A total of nine tests were administered. There were no failure (4) Armed Respondert Twenty-seven of the forty-two individuals available for testing in this job category were randomly selected by the inspectors and tested by the Itcensee in the eleven written tests associ-ated with this job category. Thirty-three tests were admin-istered. Three individuals failed one test eac Testina Program _Results The inspectors determined that the members of the Unit 1 security force are adequately trained to carry out their assigned duties and responsibilities. Remedial training and retesting was promptly administered to a11 individuals who failed any portion of the tests included in the testing program. Overall test results indicate that, at the 95*4 confidence level, a minimum of 91*; of security force personnel are sufficiently knowledgeable to carry out their assigned duties. This value is biased low due to seven failures in a specific task, where an apparent problem with the test itself or the training exists. If those test results are ignored, the overall test results indicate that a minimum of 95?4 of security force personnel are suff t-ciently knowledgeable to carry out their assigned responsibilitie . Preoperational Secur_i_ty Pro 2 ram Review - Unit _2 The inspectors review of the Unit 2 security program disclosed the following:

.

r

, .

The final security plan for Unit 1 and Unit 2 (combined) has not been submitted to the NRC for approva *

Installation of protected area barriers, intrusion detectiori systems and assessment aids was not complet *

Installation of Vital Area barriers, intrusion detection systems and access control hardware was not complet *

Screening, training and badging for Unit 2 personnel were not complet Based on the above, a meaningful review of the Unit 2 security program could not be performed. Additional preoperational review of the Unit 2 security program will be conducted when further progress has been attaine . Exit Interview The inspectors met with the licensee representatives identified in paragraph I at the conclusion of the inspection on January 30, 1987. At that time, the purpose and scope of the inspection were reviewed and the findings presente At no time during the inspection was written material provided to the licensee by the inspectors.

. .