ML13308A166
| ML13308A166 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | San Onofre  |
| Issue date: | 08/02/1982 |
| From: | Eisenhut D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Ahearne J, Gilinsky V, Palladino N NRC/OCM |
| Shared Package | |
| ML13308A167 | List: |
| References | |
| TASK-AS, TASK-BN-82-74 BN--82-74, BN-82-74, NUDOCS 8208110097 | |
| Download: ML13308A166 (7) | |
Text
AUG 2 1982 Docket Nos.:
50-361 and 50-362 MEMORANDUM FOR:
Chairman Palladino Commissioner Gilinsky Commissioner Ahearne Commissioner Roberts Commissioner Asselstine FROM:
Darrell G. Eisenhut, Director Division of Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
SUBJECT:
INFORMATION REGARDING SAFEGUARDS INFORMATION AT SAN ONOFRE (Board Notification No. 82-74)
In accordance with present NRC procedures for Board Notification, the following letters are hereby transmitted to the Board.
(1) Letter dated June 17, 1982 from NRC Region V Administrator to Southern California Edison Company, attention Dr. L. T. Papay.
(2) Letter dated June 17, 1982 from NRC Region V Administrator to Southern California Edison Company, attention Mr. R. Dietch.
Letter (1), above, transmits a Notice of Violation and Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalty resulting from apparent violations associated with the implemen tation of the San Onofre Unit 1 physical security plan.
The letter indicates concern about the apparent weakness in the management oversight and supervision in the security program. Since all three units at San Onofre share the same security plan, and all are managed by SCE, this letter raises the issue of the adequacy of securityplan implementation and management oversight/supervision at San Onofre Units 2 and 3, as well as at Unit 1. Preliminary staff evaluation of this issue has verified that the San.Onofre physical security plan itself is not deficient. Rather, the deficiency appears to be one of inadequate management attention to the implementation of the plan.
Letter (2), above, transmits the report of an NRC Task Force which reviewed interface problems, at San Onofre 2, between physical security measures and operational response to emergency conditions.
The Task Force report identified a number of areas in which security procedures at San Onofre 2 could potentially have an adverse effect on plant safety.
Preliminary staff evaluation of this issue has verified that the San Onofre physical security plan is not deficient.
Rather, the deficiency appears to results from the specific procedures used by the licensee to implement the plan. These procedure, in many instances appear to be unn"coorily re ictive.
OFFICE....
1 7..........
SURNAME y..
8208110097 820802 PDR ADOCK 05000361 DATE F
PDR NRC FORM 318 (10-80) NRCM 0240 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY USGPO: 1981-335-960
The Commission
- 2 The NRC staff discussed both of these letters with the licensee in a meeting on June 17, 1982, in Walnut Creek, California. The licensee has submitted corrective action plans for the issues raised in the letters. These plans are being reviewed by the staff and their implementation will be inspected and monitored.
The two letters being transmitted do not contain Safeguards Information, and are decontrolled when separated from their enclosure. The enclosures to the two letters are not included in the Board Notification because the letters adequately summarize the issues involved.
Original Signed By:
Darrell G. Eisenhut, Director Division of Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Enclosures:
As stated cc:
ASLAB ASLBP OGC OPE SECY Board Service List
Contact:
Harry Rood, ONRR X28427 Distribution:
See attached sheet
- See previous page for concurrences/initials
.DL:LB#3 DL :
AD.
- HRood:cz
- FMiraglia
- RTedesco D
u sURNAME10.........................
DATE
- *2*9*
...*****. 6129*.
82.....
NRC FORM 318 (10-80) NRCM 0240 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY USGPO: 1981-335-960
The Commission
- 2 The NRC staff discussed both of these letters with the licensee in a.eeting on June 17, 1982, in Walnut Creek, California. The licensee agre to submit corrective action plans for the issues raised in the letters.
ese plans will be reviewed by the staff upon receipt, and their implementa on will be inspected and monitored.
The two letters being transmitted do not contain S eguards Information, and are decontrolled when separated from their enc1 re. The enclosures to the two letters are not included in the Board Not' ication because the letters adequately summarize the issues involved.
f the Board wishes to pursue these issues, the enclosures can be provided, bject to the appropriate control measures.
Darrell G. Eisenhut, Director Division of Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Reoulation
Enclosures:
As stated cc:
SECY Board Service List
Contact:
Harry Rood, ONRR X28427
- See previous page for concur ences/initials OFFICE) DL:LB#3 DL:LB#3 DL:AD:L DL:DIR SURNAME
- HRood:ph
- FMiraglia
- RTedesco DEisenhut DATE) 6/ 07 /82
/ A /82 6/29/82 7/
/82 NRC FORM 318(10/80) NRCM 0240 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY USGPO: 1980-329-824
-2 The NRC staff discussed both of these letters with the license in a meeting on June 17, 1982, in Walnut Creek, California. The licenseecgreed to submit corrective action plans for the issues raised in the lette.
These plans will be reviewed by the staff upon receipt, and their impleme, ation will be inspected and monitored.
The two letters being transmitted do not contain S feguards Information, and are decontrolled when separated from their enclore. The enclosures to the two letters are not included in the Board Notijication because the letters adequately summarize the issues involved. I the Board wishes to pursue these issues, the enclosures can be provided, su ect to the appropriate control measures.
Robert L. Tedesco, Assistant Director for Licensing Division of Licensing OFFCE) LB#3 : DL
- D.A D
sURNAME)..
hRo.od.:.ph.
.e.s..o.........................
NRC FORM 318 (10-80) NRCM 0240 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY USQPO: 1981-335-900
DISTRIBUTION-OF BOARD NOTIFICATION San Onofre 2&3/COMM Docket Nos. 50-361/362 OL ACRS Members Stephen F. Eilperin, Esq.
Dr. Robert C. Axtmann Dr. Reginald L. Gotchy Mr. Myer Bender Dr. Cadet H. Hand, Jr.
Dr. Max W. Carbon Mrs. Elizabeth B. Johnson Mr. Jesse C. Ebersole Dr. W. Reed Johnson Mr. Harold Etherington James L. Kelley, Esq.
Dr. William Kerr
'Dr. Harold W. Lewis
-.Mr. A. S. Carstens Dr. J. Carson Mark Mr. Gary D. Cotton Mr. William M. Mathis Phyllis M. Gallagher, Esq.
Dr. Dade W. Moeller Mrs. Lyn Harris Hicks Dr. David Okrent Janice E. Kerr, Esq.
Dr. Milton S. Plesset Charles R. Kocher, Esq.
Mr. Jeremiah J. Ray Charles E. McClung, Jr., Esq.
Dr. Paul C. Shewmon David R. Pigott,-Esq.
Dr. Chester P. Siess Alan R. Watts, Esq.
Mr. David A. Ward Richard J. Wharton, Esq.
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Panel Docketing and Service.Section Document Management Branch
N0EA UNITED STATES NP EAR REGULATORY COMMISSIO REGION V 1450 MARIA LANE, SUITE 260 WALNLrCREEK, CALIFORNIA 94596 Dine 17I982 Docket No.
50-206 EA 82-43 Southern California Edison Company ATTN:
Dr. L. T. Papay, Vice President Advanced Engineering P.O. Box 800 2244 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead, CA 91770 Gentlemen:
';s a result of a routine unannounced NRC physical protection inspection conducted January 10-12, and February 8-12, 1982 at the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, Unit 1, apparent violations associated with the implementation of your physical security plan were identified. We are particularly concerned about the apparent weakness in the management oversight and supervision in your security program. These problems were discussed during a site visit by the Director of the Office of Inspection and Enforcement, the Director of the Division of Safeguards, NMSS, and myself on May 18, 1982. The issues and possible courses for correcting the problems were also discussed at a meeting between your staff and Region V on March 10, 1982.
The violations described in the Appendix to this letter, when taken in total, indicate inadequate management control of the physical security program at the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station. After consultation with the Director of the Office of Inspection and Enforcement, I have been authorized to issue the enclosed Notice of Violation and Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalty in the amount of Sixty Thousand Dollars. This action is taken
- in order to empihasize the need for greater management attention to physical protection.
You are required to respond to the Appendix and you should follow the instruc tions specified in the Appendix in preparing your response. In your reply you should.give particular attention to those actions designed to increase the effectiveness of the management of your security program in order to ensure
,continuing compliance with-NRC requirements in this area. As part of your response to the enclosed Notice of Violation, you are required to submit a written plan, in accordance-with 10 CFR. 50.54(f), which details the steps you will take to remedy problems associated with responses to security alarms and reduce the potential for future violations in that area. The plan should describe what actions you have taken to assure that the underlying causes are well understood and corrected. Specifically, this plan shou)d assure positive access control in order to improve the physical security at 'your plant, and shall include:
(1) a description of actions to be taken, including the details concerning any necessary changes to equipment, procedures, and personnel, (2) a schedule, with important milestones, for completion of all steps, (3) docu mentation requirements, and (4) description of-the steps.to follow up the actions u
RanZLCoous_ ISAFEGUARDS INFORMATION
..Aa
.7-ZTpZaS
Southern California Edison Company 2 -
June 17, 1982 described in (1) above to monit the effctiveness.6fthose actions. During our May 18, 1982 meeting you indicated that you planned to procure and install a new central processing unit and may install additional key card controls. The above plan should include specific details concerning these actions and schedules for their completion.
After reviewing the plan, we will consider whether to formalize it or require modification of it by way of an order.
In addition to our concerns related to access controls, we also discussed during our meetino broader issues related to overall physical security at the facility.
in that regard, we understand that you intend to undertake a complete review of your physical security plan for submittal to NMSS.
You should include in your response to this letter your schedule for this review and your expected submittal date to NMSS.
The text of the enclosed Appendix contains Safeguards Information as defined by 10 CFR 73.21 and its disclosure to unauthorized individuals is prohibited by Section 147 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended. Therefore, the Appendix will not be placed.in the NRC Public Document Room.
The responses directed by this letter and the accompanying Notice are not subject to the clearance procedures-of the Office of Management and Budget as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, PL 96-511.
Sincerely, Robert H. Engelken Regional Administrator
Enclosure:
Appendix -
Notice of Violation and Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalty cc w/o end: George Deukmejian, Attorney General John E. Bryson, Pres.
Public Utilities Comm.
California Dept of Health Services cc.w/enc:
R. Dietch, SCE H. B. Ray, SCE (San Clemente)
Pd