IR 05000352/1986001
| ML20210L540 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Limerick  |
| Issue date: | 03/24/1986 |
| From: | Murley T NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | Boyer V PECO ENERGY CO., (FORMERLY PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20210L545 | List: |
| References | |
| CON-#286-669 EA-86-034, EA-86-34, OL, NUDOCS 8604290536 | |
| Download: ML20210L540 (2) | |
Text
f
-.
...,'o UNITED STATES
g NUCLEAR RE2ULATORY COMMISSION
,,-
!
g
REGION I
MELATED CORRESPONDEN3
'
j 031 PARK AVENUE
'
8,
&
KING oF PMUSSIA. PENNSYLVANIA 19408 s.
%,*....,o#
'
MAR 2 41986 ogQco Docket No. 50-352 O L-
'86 28 M :50 License No. NPF-27 EA 86-34
$$C[$m.,
.
CF fejjNW.
Philadelphia Electric Company ATTN: Mr. V. Boyer Senior Vice President, Nuclear Power 2301 Market. Street Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19101 Gentlemen:
Subject: NOTICE OF VIOLATION (NRC Inspection No. 50-352/86-01)
This refers to the special NRC inspection conducted by a Region I staff member on January 2-4 and 8-9,1985 at the Limerick Generating Station, Limerick, Pennsylvania, the results of which are documented in the inspection report sent 17, 1986. The inspection was conducted to review the circum-to you on January stances associated with a violation involving openings in the protected area I
and vital area Unit 1/ Unit 2 interface barriers, which were identified by your staff and reported to the NRC, and also to review an allegation received by this office that security deficiencies were not being properly documented and reported. The allegation was substantiated and resulted in identification of additional violations of your physical security plan: one for security force members leaving posts without authorization and one for failing to document and report that fact to the NRC. Subsequently, on January 29, 1986, another instance of a security force member leaving his assigned post was identified by your Station Manager. On February 7,1986, an enforcement conference was con-ducted with you and members of your staff to discuss the violations, their causes and your corrective actions.
The NRC commends the initiative of the individual in your organization who
-
identified the openings in the protective barriers, and also commends the Station Manager for identifying an instance of a security force member leaving his assigned post.
In addition, your organization is commended for the None-prompt and ' comprehensive measures initiated as a result of these events.
theless, the NRC is conce'rned that (1) the barrier openings, which apparently had existed prior to the effective date of the security plan, were not identi-fled during initial "walkdowns" of the barrier, (2) security force members did not adhere to their procedural requirements in that they left assigned posts on two occasions, as cited above, and (3) a security supervisor did not document and report the security force member leaving his post to higher supervision once he became aware of the incident. While the NRC acknowledges that you have taken actions to improve procedural adherence by disciplining and retraining the individuals responsible as well as other members of the security force, 8604290536 860324 PDR ADOCK 05000352 G
,
p
,
.-
MAR 2 41986 Philadelphia Electric Company-2-further actions are needed in the form of increased and improved oversight of your contractor's activities on a continuing basis to assure adequate implemen-tation of program requirements.
The three vi31ations are described in detail in the enclosed Notice and are
.
'
classified as a Severity Level III problem in accordance with the " General Statement of Policy and Procedure for Enforcement Actions," 10 CFR Part 2, Appendix C (1985). Although a civil penalty is normally considered for a
.
'
Severity Level III violation, we have decided, after consultation with the Director, Office of Inspection and Enforcement, not to issue a civil penalty for these violations because: -(1) the openings in the barriers were not obvious, (2) the guards lef t their posts only for short periods of time, and (3) your corrective actions for the individual violations were prompt and comprehensive.
Nonetheless, we emphasize that any similar violations in the future may result in additional enforcement action.
You are required to respond to the enclosed Notice and you should follow the instructions specified therein when preparing your response.
In your response, you should describe actions planned to improve and increase oversight of your security contractor's activities.
Further, you should place all Safe-guards Information (as defined in 10 CFR 73.21) and all commercial or financial information (as defined in 10 CFR 9.5(a)(4)) in enclosures, so as to allow your letter (without enclosures) to be placed in the Public Document Room.
(
The enclosed Notice contains details of your security program that have been determined to be exempt from public disclosure in accordance with 10 CFR 73.21 (Safeguards Information). Therefore, those portions of the Notice will not be placed in the Public Document Room and will receive limited distribution.
The responses directed by this letter and the enclosed Notice are not subject to the clearance procedures of the Office of Management and Budget as required by the Paperwork Redur tion Act of 1980, PL 96-511.
Sincerely,
..
.-
Thomas E. Murle Regional Administrator cc w/enci (w/o Sageguards Information):
V. S. Boyer, Senior Vice President, Nuclear Power John S. Kemper, Vice President, Engineering and Research G. Leitch, Station Manager (w/ Safeguards Information)
Troy B. Conner, Jr., Esquire (Receives All 2.790 Information)
Eugene J. Bradley, Esquire, Assistant General Counsel W. M. Alden, Engineer in Charge, Licensing Section Limerick Hearing Service List Public Document Room (PDR)
Local Public Document Room (LPDR)
Nuclear Safety Information Center (NSIC)
NRC Resident Inspector (w/ Safeguards Information)
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
-
.
.
-
-
- - -
-
-