IR 05000335/1989011
| ML20247H292 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Saint Lucie  |
| Issue date: | 05/15/1989 |
| From: | Mcguire D, Tillman A NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17223A152 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-335-89-11, 50-389-89-11, NUDOCS 8905310205 | |
| Download: ML20247H292 (2) | |
Text
,
---
. [,m.l%o,^
'
SAFEGUAESJMFORMATiON
..
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMhlSSION 2 %.-
"
REGloN 11 I
'
e TLAN G ORGlA 032 l
g **v /
[
l Report Nos.:
50-335/89-11 and 50-389/89-11 Licensee:
Florida Power and Light Company 9250 West Flagler Street Miami, FL 33102 Docket Nos.:
50-335 and 50-389 License Nos.-
. Facility Name:
St. Lucie 1 and 2
.
Inspection Con acte March,27-31, 1989 Inspector:
8dMT!r 1/[d[
/
,
A.'Tillma { ysMai' S'ecurity inspector
'Date' Si gfied
'
Approved by-
/ h D. R. McGufre" Chief J5 ate /Si'gned Physical Security Section Nuclear Materials Safety and Safeguards Branch Division of Radiation Safety and Safeguards SUMMARY Scope:
This routine, unannounced inspection was conducted in the areas of Management Support, Security Program Plan Audits;. Protected and Vital Area Barriers, Detection and Assessment Aids;. Protected and Vitel Area Access Control of Personnel, Packages and " Vehicles; Alarm Stations and Communications; Power Supply; Testing, Maintenance and Compensatory Measures; and Security Training and Qualification.
Results:
In the areas inspected, no new items of noncompliance were identified. However, review of the circumstances of three licensee reported safeguards events resulted in the identification of two violations in the areas of visitor control and deportability of safeguards events. In addition, two violations relating to pv nnel and visitor access control, identified and reported by the licei, ee (nad were confirmed as licensee identified non-cited violations for which adequate corrective actions had been implemented.
These violations n
are not being cited because the criteria specified in section V.G of A$
the Enforcement Policy were satisfied.
28u)-
gg 1.
Failure to provide positive control of visitors in the protected Go area.
nr ou 2.
Failure to submit safeguards event report within the required o8 time of one-hour after discovery.
E#
hg
{yy" ovummt tmmre?y"'h SAFEGUARDS INFORMA i tw o
m
-
_
,
,.
,
^
~ 2 3.
Failure' to verify access authorization for a nondesignated vehicle processed into the protected area (licensee identified non-cited violation).
4.
Failure to adequately secure alarmed containment equipment hatch (licensee identified non-cited violation).
With the exception of the issues addressed above, inspection results indicate that the security' organization continues to function at the level of effectiveness noted in recent inspections with improvements noted in several areas.
Two of the violations cited, while attributable to the security program, were committed by nonsecurity personnel who had been provided appropriate guidance to preclude the occurrence of such violations. Positive corrective action was initiated in response to the violations and strong senior plant management support for the security program was demonstrated.
l II l
l l
l n,a y,mt tr nmm "ed '*"' $$$$5bbh
,
l