IR 05000387/1988002

Insp Repts 50-387/88-02 & 50-388/88-02 on 880104-07.No Violations Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Security Organization & Program Audit,Lighting,Assessment Aids,Access Control, Alarm Stations & Followup to Unresolved Items

ML20196E324
Person / Time
Site:	Susquehanna
Issue date:	02/19/1988
From:	Bailey R, Keimig R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
To:
Shared Package
ML20196E314	List: IR 05000387/1988002 ML20196E309
References
50-387-88-02, 50-387-88-2, 50-388-88-02, 50-388-88-2, NUDOCS 8803010036
Download: ML20196E324 (3)

Text

. - -

_ _ _ - _ _- _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ ,

_

, ~; -

'

,,

t

.

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

REGION I

50-387/88-02 Report No /88-02 50-387-Docket No NPF-14 License No NPF-22 Licensee:- Pennsylvania power and Light Company -

2 North Ninth Street

= Allentown, Pennsylvania 18101 Facility Name: Susquehanna Steam Electric Station  ;

Inspection At: Salem Township, Pennsylvania l Inspection Conducted: _ January 4-7, 1988

Date of Last Physical Security Inspection: March 2-6, 1987 '

'

Type of Inspection: Routine, Unannounced physical Securi'.y__ l Inspector: _

'

dus .7 - //- # ~

R. ~ Bailey,py'sical Sedrity Inspector date .

i Approved by: . "/ J - / P-# #  !

. R. Keimig, ChTef f afeguards Section date Division of Radiation Safety and Safeguards i Inspection Summary: Routine, Unannounced physical Security Inspection on January 4-7, 1988 (Combined Inspection Nas. 50-387/88-02 and 50-388788-02)

i Areas Inspected: Security Organization; Security Program Audit; Lighting; r

~

Assessment Aids; Access Centrol (Personnel); Alarm Stations and Follow-up to an Unresolved Ite [

Results: The licensee was in compliance with NRC-approved security plans in [

the areas inspecte ;

80f*h $

0 i i

!

'

s 7 n .

I

..  ;

i

!

l DETAILS

Key Persons Contacted  ;

R. Byram, Plant Manager i D. Roth, Senior Compliance Engineer .

'R. Prego, Supervisor, Nuclear Quality Assurance  !

-

R. Statler, Security Supervisor- f F.-1. Young, USNRC Senior Resident Inspector f J. R. Stair, USNRC Resident Inspector

.

j

.

fha inspector also interviewed other licensee personnel and members of  !

the proprietary guard forc [

t g Follow-up on an Unresolved Item i

"

(Closed) UNR, 50-387/86-23-01 and 50-388/86-24-86-24-01: Licensee does not completely address the interface responsibilities between operations  :

and security for certain security contingency events. The inspector  !

confirmed that the licensee had cotr.pleted the actions committed to in its #

response to the inspection. In addition, the licensee provided additional  !

information and training to plant operators and key security supervisors  :

and has added security contingency and interface training to the initia)

and annual retraining schedule for operations supervisory personne ;

m Security Organization  !

The inspector reviewed the security organization and found it to be in  :

conformance with the NRC-approved physical security plan. The inspector ,

determined that nine individuals lef t the security force since January 1,  ;

1987; two resigned and seven transferred to other departments within the >

comparsy. No discrepancies were note .

'! Security program Audit  :

! The inspector reviewed NQA Report No.87-063 and found that the licen-  !

'

'

see had properly and adequately audited the security program between

>

September 15-October 6, 1937 to determine its continued effectiveness.

The inspector observed that the security supervisor had adequately addressed the findings of the audit and was in the process of responding  !

'

to the recommendations for improvement !

E Lichting [

t The inspector conducted a tour of the entire protected area, accompanied [

by a licensee representative, during the hours of darkness (7:30 p.m.-  !

10:00 p.m.) on January 4, 1988. Direct measurements of lighting levels [

was not possible because the licensee's light meter was not operable, j

!

b i

L I

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ >

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

.

The inspector observed several areas within the protected area where light bulbs were burned out and two areas where the general lighting patterns had been altered because of equipment storage. The licensee took immediate compensatory security measures and on January 6,1988, conducted a lighting survey of the questionable areas with a calibrated light meter. The survay results indicated that the illumination was marginal but sufficient to discern the presence of unauthorized individuals or act'vitie The inspector agreed with the assessment made by the licensee. The security supervisor actnowledged the inspector's observations and stated that: (1) a lighting survey will be conducted as soon as possible throughout the entire protected area; (2) temporary lighting will be installed, where necessary. t; increase illumination levels until permanent lighting can be provided; and (3) security procedures will +

be reviewed to ensure that they clearly address the identification of potential lighting problems by security officer . Assessment Aids The inspector determined by observation during the hours of darkness and in daylight that the assessment aids utilized by the licensee conformed to the NRC-approved physical security plan. All equipment was functioning properl . Access Cc., trol (Personnel)

The inspector observed that the licensee had installed new explosive detectors and X-ray machines in the North and South Gate Houses to aid in the search of individuals entering the y stected are Security force personnel demonstrated adequate skill and kn.wledge in the performance of their dutie . Alarm Stations i The inspect)r determined by direct observations at the central and secondary alarm station (CAS/SAS) that they were in conformance with the NRC-approved physical security plan. The inspector noted that CAS and SAS operators demonstrated adequate skill and knowledge in the performance of their dutie . Exit Interview The inspector met with the licensee representatives listed in paragraph 1 at th( conclusion of the inspection on January 7, 1988. At that time, the purpose and scope of the intpection were reviewed and the findings were presente At no time during this inspection was written material provided to the licensee by the inspector . . _ _ -

.-