IR 05000397/1998012
| ML17292B430 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Columbia  |
| Issue date: | 07/31/1998 |
| From: | NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17292B429 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-397-98-12, NUDOCS 9808060021 | |
| Download: ML17292B430 (14) | |
Text
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION IV
Do'cket No.:
License No.:
Report No.:
Licensee:
Facility:
Location:
Dates:
In'spector:
Approved By:
Attachment:
50-397 NPF-21 50-397/98-12 Washington Public Power Supply System Washington Nuclear Project-2 3000 George Washington Way Richland, Washington July 13-17, 1998 Thomas W. Dexter, Senior Physical Security Specialist Plant Support Branch Blaine Murray, Chief, Plant Support Branch Division Reactor Safety Supplemental Information 98080b002i 98073i PDR ADQCK 05000397
-2-EXEC TIVE SUMMA Y Washington Nuclear Project-2 NRC Inspection Report 50-397/98-12 This routine, announced inspection focused on the licensee's physical security, access authorization, and fitness-for-duty programs.
This included review of access authorization; protected area access control of personnel, packages, and vehicles; protected area barriers and detection aids; testing and maintenance; compensatory measures; plans and procedures; security event logs; security force training; management effectiveness; staffing; audits; and fitness-for-duty. In general, performance in the areas inspected was excellent.
I n Pursuant to Section VII.B.1 of the NRC Enforcement Policy, a noncited violation was identified involving a failure to complete employment checks on two individuals before granting temporary unescorted access.
Overall, the access authorization program was effective (Section S1.1)
~
An effective program for searching personnel, packages, and vehicles was maintained.
Proper procedures were in place to control personnel, package, and vehicle access to the protected area.
Security equipment operators were efficient and well trained. Very good protected area barriers and detection systems were maintained.
One detection zone failed to alarm during a test simulating jumping into the protected area. This single failure was not identifiable or predictable.
Testing of the detection aids was performance based and ensured that system failures were discovered and corrected.
An effective testing and maintenance program was conducted. The timely response to repair detection aids, access control equipment, and vital area door locks and closures was instrumental in the low number of compensatory postings.
The security training program and documentation of training were excellent.
Security officers displayed excellent knowledge of the procedural requirements for the task they were performing. An excellent security event log system was in place for reporting safeguards events.
The licensee audits and internal self-assessment programs were excellent.
(Sections S1.2, 2.1, 2.2, 2.'3, 3.1, 3.2, 5.1, 6.1, 6.2, and 7.1)
An excellent fitness-for-duty program was in place.
Precautions had been taken to insure detection if individuals attempted to circumvent the test with false specimens.
All testing was properly conducted and monitored. The licensee's fitness-for-duty procedures were in-depth, comprehensive, and of excellent quality. (Section S8.1)
-3-IV. Pla tSu ort S1 Conduct of Security and Safeguards Activities S1.1 Acc s Au horiz ion Pr ram A ivi i s and r aniza ion a.
Ins cion c
e 8170 0201 Portions of the access authorization program were reviewed to determine compliance with 10 CFR 73.56 and the physical security plan.
s rv i n a d Fin in s
'F The quarterly security event logs listed two events involving individuals who had been granted temporary unescorted access before completing a required inquiry.
The first event was identified on April 23, 1998.
During a review of a file, an access authorization staff member found that they had reinstated an individual's temporary unescorted access on April 15, 1998.
However, a check of the reinstatement application in the file dated April 14, 1998, revealed that it was, in fact, an application on another individual. The application on the correct individual was subsequently found, and they determined that there were three employers listed where he had worked more than 30 days and suitable inquires had not been initiated before granting unescorted access.
Required inquires were initiated and the individual's file was updated on April 23, 1998, and his unescorted access was continued.
Additionally, the other individual's file was checked, and no discrepancies were noted. The individual responsible for the error was counseled.
The second event was identified on April29, 1998. An access authorization staff member received a call from another employee stating that she had found a part of an individuals employment history in a chair in a supervisor's'office.
The employment history showed unemployment from February 1998 to April 20, 1998.
The individual's backgroUnd files were reviewed, and it was found that they had verified unemployment from November 1995 to April 20, 1998; however, they entered the date on the verification form as April 20, 1997. Additional checking determined that the individual had worked for Combustion Engineering from August 11, 1997, to February 26, 1998. The individual's background information was corrected on April 29, 1998, and his unescorted access was continued.
The individual responsible for the error was counseled.
Paragraph 3.3.1 of the licensee's physical security plan requires the licensee to implement all elements of Regulatory Guide 5.66 (Access Authorization Program for Nuclear Power Plants) dated Jun'e 1991 in order to meet the requirements of 10 CFR 73.56. Paragraph 6.4 of Regulatory Guide 5.66 requires that: "Temporary unescorted access authorization may be granted based upon the satisfactory completion of... an employment check for the past year."
The failure to complete employment checks on two individuals before granting temporary unescorted access is considered a violation of Section 3 of the licensee's physical security plan. The violation was licensee identified, nonrepetitive, and corrected within a reasonable period. Accordingly, the violation is being treated as a noncited violation, consistent with Section VII.B.1 of the NRC Enforcement Policy (397/9812-01)
Qqncl~uiqn Pursuant to Section VII.B.1 of the NRC Enforcement Policy a noncited violation was identified involving the failure of the licensee to complete employment checks on two individuals before granting temporary unescorted access.
Overall, the access authorization program was effective.
S1.2 Pro c
Ar a onro fP r nn I
ka ndV hi I
a.
I c
The access control program for personnel packages and vehicles was inspected to determine compliance with the requirements of the physical security plan.
bs rv ion a
Fi din s Observations of security practices at the primary access facility and at the vehicle sallyport confirmed that security procedures in place properly controlled personnel, package, and vehicle access to the protected area.
The inspector also observed use of the X-ray machine and search of packages and material at the main access facility. The operators were efficient and well,trained.
An effective program for searching personnel, packages, and vehicles was maintained.
Security procedures in place properly controlled personnel, package, and vehicle access to the protected area.
Security equipment operators were efficient and well trained.
S2 Status of Security Facilities and Equipment S2.1 ro c ed Area Barriers and De ec ion Ai s
a.
Ins ecionSco e
7 750a d 817
The inspector reviewed the protected area barriers and detection aids to determine compliance with the requirements of the physical security plan. The aieas inspected
-5-included the features of the protected area barriers and the design and capabilities of the detection aids system.
rva i ns and Fin in The inspector conducted a walkdown inspection of the protected area barriers and determined that the protected area barriers were installed and maintained as described in the security plan. Additionally, the inspector determined that the protected area barriers provided penetration resistance to both forced and surreptitious entry and were adequate to ensure delay of a potential adversary.
The inspector observed testing of the perimeter microwave, E-field, and infrared detection systems.
The detection systems were well designed and maintained. One detection zone failed to alarm during a test simulating jumping into the protected area.
The licensee immediately implemented compensatory measures and a work request was submitted.
This was a single failure that was not identifiable or predictable without conducting the simulated jump test.
Electrical maintenance responded and adjusted the detection aids for that zone.
The detection zone subsequently passed testing.
Testing of the detection aids was performance based and ensured that system failures were discovered and corrected.
The microwave heads were double stacked and presented a difficultproblem for any intruder who wished to enter the plant undetected.
Maintenance of the perimeter detection systems was done in a timely manner.
Additionally, the" inspector verified that an alarm for each component annunciated in the continuously manned security alarm stations.
c.
Qgggjl i
Very good protected area barriers and detection. systems were maintained.
Testing of the detection aids was performance based and ensured that system failures were discovered and corrected.
One detection zone failed to alarm during a test simulating jumping into the protected area.
This single failure was not identifiable or predictable.
S2.2 T
in an M in en n
817-02
The inspector reviewed the testing and maintenance program to determine compliance with the requirements of the physical security plan.
b.
rv ions and Findin s The inspector reviewed testing and maintenance records and confirmed that the records committed to in the physical security plan were on file, well documented, and readily available for review. The licensee provided timely repair for security equipment that required corrective maintenance.
The timely response to repair detection aids, access
-6-control equipment, and vital area door locks and closures was instrumental in the low number of compensatory posting.
A quarterly preventive maintenance program was in place for the security systems.
The inspector also determined through a review of records that annual maintenance surveillances had been completed on tamper alarms nl in An effective testing and maintenance program was conducted and properly documented.
The timely response to repair detection aids, access control equipment, and vital area door locks and closures was instrumental in the low number of compensatory posting.
S2.3 C m nsa o Measures a.
In e
i nSc 8170
-
The inspector reviewed the licensee's compensatory measures program to determine compliance with the requirements of the physical security plan. The areas inspected included deployment of compensatory measures and the effectiveness of those measures.
b.
Observ ions and Findin A review of security event logs, security incident reports, and shift posting rosters confirmed that the licensee normally deployed compensatory measures in a manner consistent with the requirements in the physical security plan. The inspector determined through interviews that the security personnel available for assignment to compensatory security posts were properly trained for those duties.
c.
~conct ions The compensatory measures program was effectively implemented.
Security personnel were-well trained on the program requirements.
S3 Security and Safeguards Procedures and Documentation S3.1 Securi Pr ram Plan a d Pro du es a.
Ins ec ion co e 817 0-0203 The physical security plan and the implementing procedures were inspected to determine compliance with the requirements of 10 CFR 50.54(p) and the physical security pla b.
Observa ions and Findin s.
The inspector determined that previous plan changes were reported to the NRC within the required time frame, and changes submitted did not reduce the effectiveness of the plan. Several implementing procedures were reviewed for adequacy.
The inspector confirmed that the licensee maintained an effective management system for the development and administration of procedures and that changes to the procedures did not reduce the'ffectiveness of the licensee's security program.
c.
ggnclusions Changes to security programs and plans were reported to the NRC within the required time frame.
Overall, implementing procedures met the performance requirements in the physical security plan.
~
.2 a.
In eci n 8170
- 203 The security program safeguard event logs were inspected to determine compliance with the requirements of 10 CFR 73.71(b) and (c), 10 CFR 73.70(a)-(c), and the physical security plan. The inspector reviewed the safeguard event logs for the third and fourth quarters of 1997 and the first quarter of 1998.
b.
b rv
'o an Fi din The inspector determined by review of safeguard event logs and security incident reports that the licensee conformed to the regulatory and license requirements to report security events.
The licensee's security staff was correctly identifying and logging or reporting security events required by regulations.
In addition, the licensee used the information contained in their records and reports to track and trend problem areas and/or equipment.
c.
~Conclusi n
An excellent security event log system was in place for reporting safeguards events.
S5 Security and Safeguards Staff Training and Qualification S5.1 'curi Trainin nd ualifica ion a.
Ins ection S o e 81700-0205 The inspector reviewed the licensee's security training and qualification program to determine adequacy and compliance with the requirements of the physical security plan, training, and qualification plan and the contingency pla b.
Obs rvations and Findin s The inspector verified that the security organization conducted security training in accordance with its approved security, training, and contingency plans.
The inspector confirmed by a review of the security shift records that contingency drills were conducted periodically on shifts. Proper documentation of the shift drills was maintained on file.
Additionally, the inspector observed security officers during the performance of their duties. Allsecurity officers displayed excellent knowledge of the procedural requirements for the task they were performing.
Medical examination records for six security officers were reviewed.
The medical records were complete and indicated that the required annual medical examinations were thorough and conducted in a timely manner.
Results of the medical examinations were properly documented.
The security training program and documentation were excellent.
Allsecurity officers displayed excellent knowledge of the procedural requirements for the task they were performing. Medical examinations for security officers were thorough and well documented.
S6 Security Organization and Administration S6.1 Ma emen Effe iveness a.
Ins ec ion c
1700-0
The effectiveness of the security management staff's administration of the security program was evaluated.
b.
~Disco sion The security program was managed by a well trained and highly qualified security staff.
The inspector determined from interviews with security personnel that management of the security organization was effective.
c.
Conclusion Management of the security program was effectiv a.
In i n
- 20 The inspector reviewed the staffing requirements specified the physical security plan.
rv
'
n Fin in Discussions with security supervisors and a review of security shift personnel rosters confirmed that the correct number of security officers and armed personnel were always available as specified in the physical security plan. The licensee has not had a security officer leave the force since the end of the last SALP period.
c.
Qgg@i~
The licensee's on-shift security staffing was properly maintained.
S7 Quality Assurance in Security and Safeguards Activities.
S7.1 b.
0-The audits of the security program were inspected to determine compliance with the requirements of 10 CFR 73.55(g)(4) and the requirements of the physical security plan.
i n n
Fin in WNP-2 Security Program Audit 297-064, dated November 3, 1997, performed by the licensee's quality assurance staff was reviewed.
In addition, it was confirmed that security program audits were conducted at least every 12 months.
By a review of licensee's records and interviews with licensee personnel, the inspector confirmed that the audit team personnel were independent of plant security management and plant security management supervision.
It was determined that the audit team personnel were qualified to conduct audits.
The audit was comprehensive, intrusive, self critical, and appeared to accurately characterize the security program. An individual knowledgeable of nuclear security was employed as a consultant to provide expertise to the audit team.
In addition, WNP-2 Fitness-for-Duty and Personnel Access Data System Audit 297-077, dated January 15, 1998, performed by the licensee's quality assurance staff was reviewed.
The inspector confirmed that the audit team personnel were independent of plant fitness-for-duty and security management supervision.
The audit was comprehensive, intrusive, self critical, and appeared accurately to characterize the fitness-for-duty program.
An authority in the fitness-for-duty program area and a technical specialist licensed in clinical chemistry and toxicology were employed as consultants to provide expertise to the audit tea Conclusion The licensee audits and internal self-assessment programs were excellent.
Individuals with expertise in physical security, fitness-for-duty program area and a technical specialist licensed in clinical chemistry and toxicology were employed as consultants to provide expertise to the audit teams.
S8 Miscellaneous Security and Safeguards Issues Fi ness-for-Du In ion co 1502 A review of the licensee's implementation of their fitness-for-duty program was conducted to determine compliance with 10 CFR Part 26.
b.
rv in a
d indin s The inspector observed the operation of the fitness-for-duty testing facility, reviewed procedures, and interviewed the individuals on duty at the facility. The collection facility was being operated effectively. Precautions had been taken to insure that all testing was properly conducted and monitored to detect ifindividuals attempted to circumvent the test with false specimens.
The licensee had an approved Enzyme Multiplied Immunoassay Technique (EMIT) Laboratory at the plant that can give the licensee accurate test results on specimens within a matter of hours. 10 CFR Part 26 allows the licensee to temporarily suspend individuals from unescorted access based on presumptive positive screening results reported by the onsite testing facilityfor cocaine and marijuana.
This latitude is allowed only ifat least 85% of the specimens that screened positive on site were subsequently reported as positive by the certified offsite laboratory.
During 1997 WNP-2's onsite testing facility demonstrated 100% agreement with the certified testing laboratory for these two metabolites.
The onsite laboratory's high degree of accuracy was considered a program strength.
The licensee's fitness-for-duty procedures were in-depth, comprehensive, and of excellent quality. The fitness-for-duty staffs were highly trained professionals.
An excellent fitness-for-duty program was in place.
Precautions had been taken to insure detection ifindividuals attempted to circumvent the test with false specimens.
All testing was properly conducted and monitored. The licensee's fitness-for-duty procedures were in-depth, comprehensive, and of excellent quality. The fitness-for-duty staff was highly trained professional V.
a a erne eei X1 Exit Nleeting Summary The inspector presented the inspection results to members of licensee management at the conclusion of the inspection on July 16, 1998.
The licensee acknowledged the findings presente ATTACHMENT SUPPLEMENTAL INFORIIATION PARTIALLIST OF PERSONS CONTACTED D. Coleman, Manager, Regulatory Affairs A. Conner, Security Operations Lead F. Dehart, Supervisor, Safeguards and Investigations R. Givin, Security Force Supervisor J. Gloyn, Security Supervisor, Training P. Inserra, Licensing Manager D. Martin, Manager, Security Programs J. Massey, Quality Technical Specialist G. Smith, Plant General Manager R. Stevens, Security Lieutenant A. Witt, Fitness-for-Duty Leader NS EC N
CED E
U ED IP 81700 IP 92704 IP 81502 EM P
C D
DDI C S
ED 50-397/9812-01 NCV Failure complete suitability inquiries before granting temporary unescorted access to the protected area.
Qhxd 50-397/9812-01 NCV Failure complete suitability inquiries before granting temporary unescorted access to the protected are LIST OF LICENSEE DOCU ENTS REVIEWED Physical Security Plan including Revisions 36 and 37.
Security Training and Qualification Plan, Revision 11, January 26, 1994 Fitness-for-Duty and Personnel Access Data System Audit 297-077, January 15, 1998 WNP-2 Security Program Audit 297-064, November 3, 1997 Security Incident Reports 98-04-02-12, 98-04-02-15, 98-06-02-18 and 98-06-02-20 WNP-2 Security Plan Implementing Procedure 10.28.53, "Tamper and Supervisory Alarms,"
Revision 0, August 21, 1997 Investigations Desktop Instruction, "Unescorted Access Authorization," Revision 0, July 2, 1998 Fitness-for-Duty Instruction, "Drug Chemical Testing and Processing," Revision 9, March 2, 1998 Security Plan Implementing Procedure SEC-18, "Safeguards Compensatory Measures,"
Revision 0, February 19, 1998