LIC-97-0034, Comment on Proposed Rev to RG 5.62, Reporting of Safeguards Events. Generally Draft Suggests More Stringent Reporting Requirements than Industry Now Following in Generic Ltr 91-03.No Analysis Performed to Determine Cost/Benefit

Comment on Proposed Rev to RG 5.62, Reporting of Safeguards Events. Generally Draft Suggests More Stringent Reporting Requirements than Industry Now Following in Generic Ltr 91-03.No Analysis Performed to Determine Cost/Benefit

ML20203L520
Person / Time
Site:	Fort Calhoun
Issue date:	03/02/1998
From:	Gambhir S OMAHA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT
To:	NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION (ADM)
References
FRN-63FR275, RTR-REGGD-05.062, RTR-REGGD-5.062 63FR275-00011, 63FR275-11, GL-91-03, GL-91-3, LIC-97-0034, LIC-97-34, NUDOCS 9803060105
Download: ML20203L520 (7)

Text

'

&)*d .27[

0998 ekm om amenwowict ~** 7w

\913 g3 it F4 D 3 utsaumsu m ommmeetaem gutES & 05;;,,enCH March 2, 1998 US N"* LIC-97-0034 Rules and Directives Branch Office of Administration U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555-0001

References:

1. Docket No. 50-285

2. Federal Register Volume 63 dated January 5, 1998 (63 FR 275)

Subject:

Comments on Proposed Revision to Regulatory Guide 5.62, Reporting of Safeguards Events The Omaha Public Power District (0 PPD) has reviewed the subject proposed revision of Regulatory Guide (RG) 5.62. In general, the draft suggests more stringent reporting requirements than the industry is now following in Generic Letter 91-03, Reporting of Safeguards Events. If the proposed RG is published as drafted, more one-hour reports will certainly result. No analysis has been performed to determine the cost / benefit of such an apparent backfit. Detailed comments may be found in the attechment to this letter Please contact me if you have any questions. Sincerely. I f M \ 3 S. K. Gambhir Division Managtr Engineering & Operations Support Attachment 5803060105 980302 TCM/tcm $$R06 PDR c: E. W. Merschoff NRC Regional Administrator, Region IV L. R. Wharton, NRC Project Manager W. C. Walker NRC Senior Resident Inspector Document Control Desk Winston & Strawn llllfffllfff!!Ijlll ffllfffflj!!lll c5 5124 Employment with EqualOpportunity

s LIC-98-0034 Attachment Page 1 Omaha Public Power District Comments on Regulatory Guide 5.62 Section_2.L_Last_ paragraph The second sentence in the above paragraph requires amplification. While the centence does use the words "significant flaws," a corresponding qualifiei needs to precede the words " reduction in overall protection." Without such clarification, a gray area exists with respect to what should or should not be reported to the NRC within one hour. As written, any compensated reduction in protection would have to be reported within one hour. Section_2.2._Examp.le_2 The word " credible" should be inserted at the beginning of the above example as is currently the case in Revision 1 of the Regulatory Guide. By reporting all threats without regard to assessing credibility, licensees would fall prey to any person who is looking for publicity. The reportability system should not encourage such a situation. Appendix G addresses only credible threats. Sect _1on_2.2._ Example _4 Delete "or loss" since loss of safeguards is covered by Section 2.4. Example 12. Section_2.2 _ Example _9 Change the word " safety" to " safety related" in the first sentence. This is necessary to tvoid any confusion between industrial safety and nuclear safety issues. Appendix G requires tampering to be reported only when it results in the

      " interruption of normal operation of a licensed nuclear power reactor. ."

Example 9 should either be withdrawn or modified to more clearly state that the one hour clock starts when tampering has been confirmed to be of malevolent intent. Reference to " suspicious" origin is too broad a term and should be deleted.

LIC-98-0034 Attachment Page 2 Section_2.2_ Example _.11 Change the first sentence to read. " Discovery of intentionally falsified identification badges or key cards that could allow unauthorized or undetected access to the protected or vital areas." This change would. provide a clearer example. . Section_2.2._ Example _12 Appendix C does not provide recommended compensatory measures for this example.

                 . Sectionl.2._ Example _12_anL16 Examples 12 and 16 s.aculd be combined for clarity.

Sect 1on_2.2._Examp.)e_12

                 - Add after the words " background information." the words. "with the intent to attempt to commit or cause events idewified in paragraphs I(a) and (d) of Appendix G to Part 73 " This would require reporting of deceptive and malevolent 4

acts specifically. identified in Appendix G. This change would exempt from reporting those acts of deception . intended for the purpose of simply gaining employment. Reference should be made to a May,1995 letter from the NRR. bafeguards Branch to Regional Branch Chiefs. Section_2.2_ Example 29

                 -Change the word "onsite" to " Protected Area." Several sites define onsite to include'the Owner Controlled Area. There appears to be no regulatory basis for reporting this event.                                                              ,

Section_2.3_Last_patagraph Add the words "or nuisance" after the word " false" in the first sentence. Normally the frequency rates of nuisance and false alarms are combined when system reliability is questioned.

      -LIC-98-0034=

Attachment Page 3 Section_2d_ Example _1 Change this sentence to read. " Loss of all AC power supply to security systems, or loss of all computer _ systems provided adequate compensatory measures can be maintained until systems are restored. Further, if a power loss or computer fai_ lure could not enable unauthorized or undetected access, no report or log entry is required. For example, a computer failure would not require reporting. if as designed, it automatically switched over to a functioning backup computer without a time delay." This change gives credit for backup computers and power supplies which are considered compensation for primary losses. Section_2A._ Example _2 This should be deleted. The event is adequately defined in Section 2,4. Example 18.8 and Section-2.5. Example 10. SectiorL2AExample_3 Examples 3 and 4 are confusing and need clarification. In addition, a definition is needed for "short period of time" in Example 3 and " considerable time" in Example 4. Section 2.4 _ Example _6 In the second sentence 9d the words "outside the Protected Area" after the word "keycard." Because of the validation step in the process, the badge is rendered useless once outside the protected area. Sectiort2.4._ Example _8 Delete "have the pctential to" and combine Example 8 with Example 1. Any system perturbation has the 'otential for creating more progressively serious events. If it doesn't resul' a degradation on loss of effectiveness, it is burdensome to_ require reportirs Section_2.L_ExampleJ Delete Example 9. since this is adequately covered in Examples 1. 8. and 14.

y LIC-98-0034~ Attachment, Page 4 Section:2.4_ Example _13 There-appears to be'no regulatory _ basis for reporting this event. Section 2 A l xample_14

           -Change the sentence to read. " Properly compensated loss of capabili.ty to remotely -

assess alarms while the intrusion detection system remains operational." Other means of assessment may be used. Section_LA_ExampleJ8.2 l There needs to'be a clear definition of what is considered a "short peri < d of-  ; l time." ' L Section_L4_Examp.lela.3 Add to this paragraph, the words. "If an individual separates from his or her escort to use a rest room which has limited means of egress, and the escort' remains nearby and has full view of the egress area no report or 100 entry is required." This' change would ensure _this practice meets the intent of the escorting-requirements, Section_2..A.._ExampleJ8 4

           ; Add to'this paragraph, the words "This event can be logged even if the employee
           .was.not authorized access to a VA if the improper entry was inadvertent or without malevolent intent." Generic Letter 91-03 clearly exempts an innocent or unintentional act'from being considered a reportable occurrence.

Section_2A_ Example _1830 LAdd a new Example 11. " Contraband which is not a significant threat, e.g. , rounds of ammunition innocuously left in a coat or vehicle " This change will eliminate unnecessary logging for actions that are void of malevolent intent.

LIC-98-0034 Attachment Page ' { l l Append 1LA l In the definition of Tampering, " Altering for improper purposes or in an improper I manner " add the words, "with malevolent intent" at the end of the senter.ce. Reporting events prior to determining their validity and whether the action has or wuld have interrupted normal operation, detracts from licensees' ability to properly investigate the event. Intent and consequences are two key elements in making a reportability datermination. Human error is unintentional, whereas vandalism -is with intent, but does normally not affect safe operations. Tampering must be with intent and affect operations and safety. In the definition of Unauthorized person, de'ete the last sentence because it is l inconsistent with current guidance in Generic Letter 91-03. AppendiLC , Referring to the compensatory measures examples for Loss of all power to security l systems, the posting of security officers has been an industry wide practice for loss of security system for many years. If compensatory posting occurs within a reasonable time, there should be no need for a one hour report. Therefore, add the following paragraph: The overall .,,.9ctive is to provide compensation within ten minutes of discovery. If extenuating circumstances prevent compensation within ten minutes, the event need not be reported promptly provided that there was no malevolent intent, nothing adverse resulted from the delay, and the iicensee takes appropriate measures tc ensure a more timely response or other necessary action in the future. The objective of compensatory action is to provide comparable security measures within a reasonable timeframe to ensure no loss or degradetion of effectiveness occurs. Ten minutes is a conservative goal, but should ret be the overriding factor in determining whether adequate compensation was achieved. If compensatory actions took twelve instead of ten minutes, due to an electrical storm and safety concerns for compensatory personnel, for example, the requirement to report such an occurrence would be burdensome and provide no appreciable benefit.

ulC-98-0034 Attachment Page 6 In the last section, Vital area card readers, the words "through which access is permitted" should be added to the last sentence. If a card reader is out of service and the associated door remains lor.ked and alarmed, there is no apparent need for compensation, ,}}