IR 05000361/1997007

Partially Withheld Insp Repts 50-361/97-07 & 50-362/97-07 (Ref 10CFR73.21) on 970407-11.Major Areas Inspected:Physical Security Program Including,Personnel Access Control, Security Organization & Protected Area Barriers

ML20141B875
Person / Time
Site:	San Onofre
Issue date:	05/09/1997
From:	NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV)
To:
Shared Package
ML20141B854	List: IR 05000361/1997007 ML20141B848
References
50-361-97-07, 50-361-97-7, 50-362-97-07, 50-362-97-7, NUDOCS 9705160048
Download: ML20141B875 (2)

Text

. . . _ . . . - .- . . - _ . . _ . -. . - -.- -. -

,

. .

9

-

ENCLOSURE i '

4 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

REGION IV

!

!'

Docket No.: 50-361

50 362

^

l Licenses No.:

'

NPF-10 i 4 NPF-15

!-

Report No.: 50-361;-362/97-07 -

i /

Licensee: Southern California Edison C }.

Facility Name: San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, Units 2 and 3 *

Location: Camp Pendleton, California

- Dates: April 711,1997  ;

i  ;

! Inspector: Bruce Earnest, Physical Security Specialist, Plant Support Branch I Approved By: Blaine Murray, Chief, Plant Support Branch

Division of Reactor Safety i

l i l ATTACHMENT: Supplemental Information J

l

,

j l

DOCUMENT CONTAINS ENCLOSURE CONTAINS UPON SEPARATION THIS 9705160048 970509 " PAGE IS DECON TROLLED PDR ADOCK 05000361 0 PDR ,,

.. __ . _

.

. *

. .

,

,l I

a

I

i I

. -2-EXECUTIVE SUMMARY San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, Units 2 & 3 NRC Inspection Report 50-361;-362/97-07

. l This routine, announced inspection focused on the licensee physical security program. The areas inspected included review of personnel access control, security organization, 1 protected area barriers, protected area detection, training and qualifications, assessment aids, plans and procedures, vital area barriers, and vital area detectio Plant Suncort },

-

' * Personnel access to the protected area was properly controlled (Section S1.1).

'

• An adequate security organization was in place and capable of meeting security and I contingency plan requirements (Section S1.2). I l

.'

• The inspector identified weaknesses in portions of the protected area barrier (Section S1.3).  !

l

• An effective perimeter detection system was installed and maintained

(Section S1.4).

,

• The training and qualification program for security officers was effective

(Section S1.5).

• The assessment aids system provided adequate assessment of the perimeter

. detection zones (Section S1.6).

• The security procedures contained provisions that did not accurately reflect physical security plan requirements (Section S1.7).

• An adeqi ne vital area barrier system was in place (Section S1.8).  !

• The vital area detection aids were adequate to detect an intruder attempting to enter the vital areas (Section S1.9).

DOCUMENT CONTAINS ENCLOSURE CONTAINS UPON SEPARATION THIS PAGE IS DECONTROLLED