ML19329A507
| ML19329A507 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oconee  |
| Issue date: | 12/04/1972 |
| From: | Knuth D US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC) |
| To: | Deyoung R US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8001060024 | |
| Download: ML19329A507 (3) | |
Text
I
]'
.i DEC 4 1972 R. C. DeYoung. Assistant Director for PWR's, L
}
-RESPONSE TO TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE REQUEST - OCONEE NUCLEAR STA REVIEW 0F INDUSTRIAL SECURITY PLAN Oconee Nuclear Station Units 1. 2 & 3 Plant Name:
Licensing Stage:
OL Docket Hos.:
50-269/270/287 Branch & Project Manager Requesting Assistance:
L:PWR-4, I. A. Peltier 4
Technical Review Branch Involved:
L:0SB Requested Completion Date:
Not given Description of Review:
Review Industrial Security Plan f
dated 11/17/72 Additional information requested..
Review Status:
As requested informally, work has been completed as indicated in the block above. Our conclusions are contained in the attached report.
Original Signed by Den:Id F. Knuth D. F. Knuth. Assistant Director for Reactor Safety Directorate of Licensing i
Enclosure:
As stated cc w/ encl:
S. H. Hanauer. DRTA J. M. Hendrie. L:TR I. A. Peltier. L:PWR-4 i
A. Schwencer. L:PWR-4 R. W. Houston. L:0SB C. R. Van Niel. L:0S8 cc w/o encl:
W. Mc'hnald. L:0PS
.L:0SB" L;
l; k
., L OF F8CE *
.0R bel:cl._.RWHods't n _._.DFKnu h
~
f
.u w me.
,s 11/30/72
- 12) /72 12/ a,-/72
..._.~
l o.,,,
F.nn AEC 3 38 (Rev. 9-53) AECM 0240.
80010600 2 7
.w.94
INDUS. RIAL SECURITY PLAN OCONEE NUCLEAR STATION DOCKET NOS. 50-269/270/287 We have reviewed the Duke Power Co. Oconee Nuclear Station Security Plan, issued November 17, 1972. The plan is unacceptable as presented.
Areas of concern which are not addressed are as follows:
- 1) the testing of alanns and communication links, 2) the maintenance of records (visitors log; results of tests, inspection and maintenance; list of false alanns and actions taken), 3) the reporting of threatened or actual attempts of sabotage, 4) the periodic review and update of the Plan, 5) the surveillance of the protected area at least twice per shift, 6) the surveillance of vital areas to ascertain equipment status, 7) the provision for drills, exercises, and tests, and 8) the security of the operating unit (s), during the period the remaining unit (s) are under construction. Of those areas which are addressed, many are lacking the required detail.
Specific deficiencies are datailed below:
Section Deficiency / Additional Information Required 2.3
~
tion of Vital Area is too narrow.
What about
.. itself, and the spent fuel pool?
tr..
3.2 What is the height and construction of the security fence?
Will it be lighted? Will it be alarmed? Under what conditions and for how long, will the main gate and guardhouse not be manned? Under what conditions will visitors not require an escort while inside the protected area?
3.3 Where will the TV monitor for the intake structure be located? Where will the readout (s) be located? Are any additional TV monitors contemplated for surveillance of the vital area? Will visitors be required to sign in and. sign out?
4.1 State that the Plan will be implemented by written procedures.
4.2 Describe the actions taken in the event of an intrusion into the controlled area, and the protected area.
State and justify the time required for deployment of the security gua rds. What is the average response time for the primary local law enforcement agency?
4.4 Will the security guard force be armed, or will weapons be readily available?
4.5 What is meant by "as required" in the third sentence?
~ _.
~
T Deficisney/ Additional Information Required _
Section_
Provide separate sketches, to scale, as follows:
the controlled area and fence, the protected are and Sketch fence, and the vital areas showing all entrances.
9 9
0
.m-__
_ _ _ _