IR 05000346/1989007

Partially Withheld Physical Security Insp Rept 50-346/89-07 on 890221-0417 (Ref 10CFR73.21(c)(2)).No Violations Noted. Major Areas Inspected:Mgt Support,Protected & Vital Area Barriers,Access Control - Personnel & Alarm Stations

ML20247G421
Person / Time
Site:	Davis Besse
Issue date:	05/18/1989
From:	Christoffer G, Creed J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III)
To:
Shared Package
ML20247G410	List: IR 05000346/1989007 ML20247G404
References
50-346-89-07, 50-346-89-7, NUDOCS 8905300396
Download: ML20247G421 (3)

Text

- _ .

. _ _ .

. .

. .

.

'U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

REGION III

Report No. 50-346/89007(DRSS)

Docket No. 50-346 License No. NPF-3 Licensee: Toledo Edison Company Edison Plaza *

300 Madison Avenue Toledo, OH 42652 Facility Name: Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Inspection At: Davis-Besse Site, Oak Harbor, Ohio Inspection Conducted: February 21 through April 17, 1989 Type of Inspection: Unannounced Physical Security Inspection Date of Previous Security Inspection: July 25-29, 1988 Inspector: * *ff1 [e1 G. M. ChristofferU 5/k37 Date Physical Security Inspector Approved By: 9 bPvPl /01 6 / ff Jariies R. Crded,gChief Date Safeguards Section Inspection Summary Inspection on February 21 through April 17, 1989 (Report No. 50-346/89007(DRSS))

Areas Inspected: Management Support; Protected and Vital Area Barriers; Access Control - Personnel, Packages and Vehicles; Alarm Stations and Communications; and licensee actions on previous inspection findings and an allegatio Results: The licensee was found to be in compliance with NRC rc.quirements ;

within the areas examine The licensee's security program was adequately manage (Details: UNCLASSIFIED )

Enclosure Contains ,

e9 Upon Separation This

$DO 00$$k $$83dy Page is Decontrolled PDC

_ _ _ _ _ _ _

_ _-__ - __ - _

.

.

. _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ __ _ _ _

. . c ,

,  ;

7- . .

,

ATTACHMENT Allegationiteview: (Closed Allegation'No. RIII-88-A-0170)'

Allegation: An individual who is currently working.at Davis-Besse allegedly falsified the application paperwork by indicating that access:

authorization had never been revoked. Allegedly the individual's acces authorization had been revoked at Fermi for, falsifying information on the 1-application paperwork. . The person was granted access.to Davis-Besse l based on alleged non-factual informatio .j Background: The Region III office received information in December 1988 that,in one case, the licensee's. background screening program was .

'

inadequate. During the onsite inspection at Davis-Besse (February 21-24, 1989), Toledo Edison was requested to-provide Information concerning this allegation. The inspector received the licensee's written response on i April 17, 1989. The inspector also contacted the Fermi Security Directo '

on December 28, 1988 to obtain information on the individua Review: -The individual worked at Fermi as a Health Physics Technician for a contractor. On June 17, 1987, interim access authorization was granted based on initial background screening results. During further investigation, it was determined that it could not be verified that the individual had a.high school diploma as stated on the Personnel History Questionnaire. The individual was denied access at Fermi on December 8, 1987 because no diploma or equivalency existe On February 16, 1988, the individual was given unescorted access at Davis-Besse. This occurred after the employer supplied Toledo Edison with'

a notarized request for unescorted access which stated that the individual had undergone required screening procedures and met acceptability requirements. The contractor was required to conduct a background investigation which included: verification of: formal education information, military service, and former employment during the previous five years, and no record of felony convictions. Additionally, the individual had to be tested or examined by a psychiatrist or clinical psychologist and an appropriate certification of acceptability had to be provided by the trained professiona The screening program for Davis-Besse contained no request for information pertaining to denied access authorization at other nuclear facilitie The contractor also provided documentation to Toledo Edison on January 19, 1988 stat 1ng that the alleger had in excess of 36 months of acceptable experience and was qualified as a Health Physics Technician (H.P. Tech)

in accordance with ANSI 3.1. The resume did not indicate the individual possessed a high school diploma or GED. Instead, the individual was given and passed a competency test prior to employment at Davis-Besse as a Tech. Personnel procedures allowed either a diploma or a successful competency test. The individual's work was under daily supervision by a foreman and supervisor and no quality or safety problems were note l

_--- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - _ _ _ i

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

.

. ,

, ..

. ..

After receiving the allegation from the NRC, Toledo Editon began an investigation. Investigators verified the individual's site access denial at Fermi. They also interviewed contractor representatives and the individual, in addition to reviewing background screening documentatio After the interview on February 21, 1989, during which the individual claimed to possess a high school diploma, the access was denied pending further investigation. After reviewing the contractor's documents the Toledo Edi' son investigators concluded that the individual did not have a high school diploma. The contractor disclosed to investigators that they concluded this earlier, and had counseled the individual about falsifying information. In a memo to file dated September 12, 1988, the contractor stated that the formal education information was falsified and the individual was counseled. The contractor determined that, because of the counseling and the amount of work experience, the individual was reliable and was rehired. The contractor determined that since the high school diploma did not fit the category for formal education within the previous five years, they did not have to report it to Toledo Ediso On February 24, 1989, the individual was placed on Davis-Besse's permanent denied access list for failure to cooperate with the investigation and continued insistence that the educational background was not falsifie The licensee determined that this conflicting information raised doubt about the individual's trustworthines As a result of the investigation findings, specific contractual conditions have been placed on the contractor. Prior to access authorization, Toledo Edison representatives will review background documents used to complete the request for unescorted access document. Additionally a full disclosure is now required prior to assignment if an individual is on a denied access list for any nuclear facilit Conclusion: The individual did not falsify Davis-Besse application paperwork by indicating that access authorization had never been revoked, because that information was never requeste The individual's access authorization had been revoked at Fermi because they were unable to verify the individual's formal educatio The individual was granted access to Davis-Besse based on information supplied by the contractor that the required screening had been conducted and the individual was judged to be security reliable and acceptabl Subsequently, the licensee determined that the individual was not trustworthy and the individual's access was revoke This allegation is close J l

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