IR 05000382/1993002

Insp Rept 50-382/93-02 on 930119-21.No Violations Noted. Major Areas Inspected:Physical Security Program,Security Plans & Procedures,Security Training & Qualification Records & Repts

ML20128G469
Person / Time
Site:	Waterford
Issue date:	02/05/1993
From:	Murray B NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV)
To:
Shared Package
ML19063E013	List: IR 05000382/1993002
References
50-382-93-02, 50-382-93-2, NUDOCS 9302160016
Download: ML20128G469 (6)

Text

.

..

.=

APPENDIX U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION I s Inspection Report:

_

50-382/93-02 Operating License: NPF-38 Licensee: Entergy Operations, In P.O. Box B Killona, Louisiana 70066 Facility Name: Waterford Steam Electric Station, Unit 3 Inspection At: Taft, Louisiana -

.

Inspection Conducted: January 19 through 21, 1993 Inspector: T. W. Dexter, Senior Physical. Security Specialist- ,

Facilities Inspection Programs Section Approved: t Ohu}'kIOJ1OV Blaine Murray, Chief, O 3

~

'

Fa ilities Inspection Ddte '

Programs Section Insnection Summary Areas Insnected: Routine, announced inspection of the licensee's physical security program. The areas inspected included security plans and procedures, '

security training and qualification records, and report '

.Results:

• The N'RC-approved Physical Security. Plan and Security Training and-

~

Qualification Plan were being effectively implemented, and implementin procedures reflected current plan changes (Section'1.3).

• Security. training was being conducted in-accordance with the NRC-approved Security Training and Qualification-P1an. Training and qualification records were maintained current and training was ~ ongoin One security officer's visual acuity qualification documentation was not complete, but the licensee took .mmediate corrective action and provided the inspector with competent medical evidence that the officer was qualified to perform armed security officer duties (Section 2.2).

'~

9302160016'930208 *

PDR ADOCK 05000382 0 -

- - .

.

y

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ - _ . _ __ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _

i

.

-2-  :

. The licensee conducted an investigation of the unattended security weapon event, implemented appropriate corrective actions, and complied ,

with their security reporting requirements (Secticn 3.2).

.

h I

f r

I e

i

'

i

)

i

-

>

P

&

.h

'

.(

_

%

i'

i

.

, i i-3- j DETAILS ,

I

!

1 PHYSICAL $ECURITY PROGRAM (81700) -1 l

The inspector reviewed certain elements of the licensee's_ physical security program in order to determine adequacy and compliance with the NRC-approved Physical Security Plan. Evaluations and determinations were based primarily on observations of acti "'as, review of records, and interviews with Itcensee and contractor security personne The inspection areas and results are discussed belo .1 Security Plans and Implementina Procedures (81018)

The Physical Security Plan and Security Training and Qualification Plan were .

'

reviewed to determine compliance with 10 CFR 50.54(p) and 10 SFR 73.55(b)

through (h).

1.2 Discussion The inspector verified that changes to the NRC-approved plans, as implemented, did not decrease the effectiveness of the plans and that implementing procedures were changed to adequately reflect plan changes. The inspector also determined from discussions with members of the licensee's security staff, licensing personnel, and management that all personnel involved in the plan change review process were very knowledgeable of NRC requirement concerning submittal of plan change .3 Conclusion The NRC-approved Physical Security Plan and Security Training and Qualification Plan were being effectively implemented, and implementing procedures reflected current plan changes, 3 2 SECURITY TRAINING AND QUALIFICATION (81501)

The Security Training and Qualification Program was inspected to determine compliance with the requirements of ') CFR 73, Appendix B,10 CFR 73.55(b)(4),

(h)(5), and the NRC-approved Security Training and Qualification Pla ' Discussion

,

The inspector reviewed the current and past 2 years of training records for 11 contract security force members and the records of five licensee supervisors for 1993 and 1991. During the review, the inspector found one contract security officer who appeared to not meet the visual acuity standards'

required by the Security . Training and Qualification Plan. The individual's annual physical showed an uncorrected near and distant visual acuity of.20/20 -

or better for the right eye and uncorrected near and distant visual aculty of 14/400 and 20/200 in the left eye. There was no documentation of testing-conducted with corrective glasses. When the inspector questioned the i

. .. .- .. . . . - . - - - .. - . . . - - . .. .-

i

.

,

i-4-  ;

licensee's training supervisor about this individual working as an armed  !

security officer, the licensee provided the following information

• The officer was hired in January 1987, and the medical documentation at  :

the time stated the individual had " center point blindness" in the left l eye. However, the doctor did not annotate this information in the

" disqualifying defects" block of the form, the licensee's review process also missed it, and the individual was hired as an armed office * During the annual requalification physical conducted in September 1987, l the reviewer did note the visual disqualification, and the individual ,

was reassigned as an unarmed nuclear watch officer. Appropriate  ;

documentation from the doctor who performed the original examination, the security force contractor, and the licensee was placed in the individual's training file explaining the entire even * In February 1990, the security force contractor sent the individual .back to a medical doctor requesting his. professional expertise in defining the defect and what compensation methods could be utilized to meet the required standards. The medical-doctor reported that the individual's visual acuity in the right eye was 20/20 for both near and distant uncorrected. The left eye was 20/25 near and distant when the ,

individual was allowed to turn his head slightly and no corrective i glasses were required. The doctor stated, "He is fully-and totally able j to perform his necessary duties as an armed nuclear security officer." -

The individual was requalified as an armed security officer and returned to armed security officer duties. However, the security officer's-annual physicals for 1991 and 1992 identified the visual acuity aroblem j in the left eye but lacked the supporting. data indicating.that tie *

individual continued to meet the required visual acuity standards in the-left eye when the head was turned slightly. When.this was identified to

'

the licensee's security supervisor, the individual was immediately removed from armed security officer duties and scheduled for'a complete visual examination on January 22, 199 The licensee provided the satisfactory results of that examination to the inspector by telecopy on January 22, 1993. The examination revealed a slight change in the distant. vision but not outside of'the NRC established standard The inspector informed the licensee that- the individual's~. annual physical must include complete documentation on acceptable visual-aculty and that they can not rely on-a'special examination'that was-conducted several years past. Th licensee indicated that in the future, complete documentation on this-individual's visual acuity would be maintaine '

During the review of security shift supervisors records from 1990 and 1991, the inspector found two training records that referenced a confidential report. The inspector requested and received a copy of the repor The report involved the informal-inquiry into the performance and recording of-specific crucial tasks by certain security force shift supervisors.- The ...

inspector reviewed the: report'and interviewed licensee security staff members-concerning the report. It appeared that the two security shift supervisors a

m _ __ , . _ _ , - .

. - - . - - _ . -- .- . _---- ~ - - ..-. .. _-- - - - -

.

'

-5- i identified in the report committed an error in the administrative  !

documentation of their training records. The licensee's inquiry, conclusions, and documentation of the event appeared to be thorough and complete. . A change i to the licensee's Security Training and Qualification Plan was submitted and

, approved by the NRC in November 1991 that remuved security shift supervisors from having to complete annual security officer trainin The inspector interviewed nine members of the contract security force and had '

discussions with several other members of the contract sect.rity force and of the licensee's security staff during the inspection. The inspector determined from those interviews and discussions that personnel were knowledgeable of their duties and responsibilitie They knew of the requirements for ,

maintaining their training records current and the performance requirements for most security positions. Security personnel observed on duty were ,

performing those duties in a competent and professional manne '

2.2 Conclusions ,

Security training was being conducted in accordance with the NRC-approved Security Training and Qualification Pla Training and qualification records were maintained current and training was ongoing. One security officer's visual acuity qualification documentation was not complete but the licensee took immediate corrective action and provided the inspector with competent medical evidence that the officer was qualified to perform armed security-officer dutie . ,

3 RECORDS AND REPORTS (81038)

3.1 Discussions ,

The inspector reviewed one security event report involving an unattended security weapon in the protected area. The incident that occurred in December 1991 was investigated by- the licensee's supervisor of security operations, and corrective actions were taken to prevent recurrence. The ,

inspector Q termined from a review of Investigation-Report A-9-92 that the licensee conducted an investigation of the incident. The licensee also-complied with their Security Procedure PS-010-103, " Security Reporting Requirements," Change 2, dated April 27,1991,~ concerning this inciden .2 Conclusion The licensee conducted an investigation of the unattended security weapon event, implemented appropriate corrective actions, and complied with their security reporting requirari.cnt .

h

- . - . , -- ,-e- ,+ , ,---,,u,.,,,.,,,n,,- rs,,,,,,,--,- , , . :; ,, -

c., ...,., ._, ~ n ; v ,- -,.. , , , n i

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

.

.

q

'

ATTACHMENJ 1 PERSONS CONTACTED < Licensee Personnel R. Allen, Manager, Security and General Support T. Becker, Licensing Engineer J. Fields, Specialist, Security Investigations /Dadging J. Gremillion, Specialist, Security Training J. Ledet Specialist, Security Operations T. Leonard, Manager, Technical Services B. Loetzerich, Licensing Engineer G. Zetsch, Specialist, Security Controls 1.2 Contractor Personnel The Wackenhut Corporation (TWC)

C. Ernst, Lead Compliance Analysis Specialist R. Scheibengraber, Security Force Coordinator 1.3 NRC Personnel D. Garcia, Reactor Engineer Intern The personnel listed above attended the exit meeting, in addition to the personnel listed above, the inspector contacted other personnel during the-inspection perio EXIT MEETING An exit meeting was conducted on January 21, 199 During this meeting, the inspector reviewed the scope and findings of the report. The licensee did not identify as proprietary any information provide to, or reviewed by, the inspector.