ML20006F453

Discusses Proposed Rule on Access Authorization at Nuclear Power Plants. Grandfathering Should Not Be Transferable from Plant to Plant & Foreign & Domestic Military Records Should Be Querried as Part of Background Investigation

ML20006F453
Person / Time
Issue date:	12/19/1989
From:	Michelson C Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards
To:	Carr K NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
References
ACRS-R-1381, NUDOCS 9002280047
Download: ML20006F453 (3)

Text

.

<_._'['

' g*as:44 w'f'.

,- i e % ? [7 g(-

h[

UNITED STATES s

T NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 1

j ]

' ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON REACTOR SAFEGUARDS wAsHWGTON, D. C. 20606 o

December 19, 1989 i

gw The Honorable Kenneth'M. Carr Cheirman.

'l U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission Washington, D.C. 20555

Dear Chairman Carr:

s

SUBJECT:

PROPOSED RULE ON ACCESS AUTHORIZATION AT NUCLEAR POWER l

. PLANTS l

The' Comilice discussed this issue during its 356th meeting, December 14-15,t 1989.; LThis issue was also discussed during meetings of. our E

Subcomittee on Human Factors on September 27, 1989 and December 12, 1989. During these meetings, we heard from members of the NRC staff and j

from' representatives of the nuclear industry.

We also had'the benefit l

of the~ documents referenced.

j i

The NRC staff has under development a rule to define requirements under which Part 50 licensees will authorize individuals to have unescorted i

access to protected and-vital areas within nuclear' power plants. These requirements are intended to help ensure the trustworthiness of persons

-granted such access and thus to reduce the potential for radiological sabotage.- This rulemaking ' has been under development for a number of -

years.

At one time the Comission considered the use of a policy statement.:rather than a regulation.

Subsequently, the-Nuclear Manage-ment and Resources Cauncil (NUMARC).. developed and published detailed guidance for licensees to use in preparing their individual programs for i

granting access authorizations.

In April of. this year, the Comission, after considering several options,- instructed the staff. to proceed with

. rulema king.

The proposed rule recognizes the industry effort and defines.very general and basic requirements.

A proposed NRC regulatory l

guide provides more detail by-~ endorsing-the NUMARC guidelines, with a y

number of exceptions and additions.

l Our-. understanding-is that the proposed rule is intended te supplement existing regulations on physical security in' nuclear power plants and

- thereby. improve the level of protection against the threat of radio-logical sabotage by an " insider."

Although programs to reduce' this b

threat are.already in place, the NRC staff has stated three reasons for their belief-that a new rule is warranted:

l (1)

It will make basic requirements for access authorization programs more easily enforceable.

psol r i 19002200047'891219 Ml PDR-ACRS whLa fS-ARI4Lm PDR j

~. _

-- x w.

A-

';6:w.

I

ib L

_The Honorable'Kenneth M. Carr

~ December.19, 1989 1:

v

-(2)

It will ensure that an apparently small number of licensees not now committed to more generally accepted minimum standards will improve L

their programs.

(3) -It will provide assurance that existing good programs will be continued; in addition, the staff believes.that the new rule, in combination with the NUMARC guidelines, will provide greater uniformity among licensee' programs and permit more facile transfer

- from one plant to another of access authorizations for individuals.

This, they believe, can result-in significant economic benefit to

. licensees..

The - rule-requires, for each. individual to be - granted access, a back- '

ground investigation, a psychological assessment, and a program for behavioral observation by the individual's supervisors.

Details of how these three attributes' of a program are to be accomplished are, provided -

in a NUMARC document entitled, " Industry - Guidelines for Nuclear Power Plant Access: Authorization Programs."

The NRC istaff believes certain exceptions' and additions' to the guidelines are necessary and has pro-vided these in a ' regulatory guide.

In addition to the guidelines, NUMARC representatives. indicate. they will provide to utilities an additional document that give:. general directions on-how the guidelines

.are to be used.

-We agree that the. rule and the associated regulatory guide should be issued as the NRC staff proposes.

However, we -have a few cautions and exceptions to this. agreement, as noted below:'

We. note that, while the rule-deals reasonably well with a threat from. an emotionally unstable individual who might - be ai potential

' saboteur it ' does. not: deal effectively with the threat from a dedicated, politically motivated terrorist.

We do. not - suggest s

anything different at this time, but we believe this limitation should.be recognized.

There are a few issues to which the liUMARC guidelines do not speak

~*

adequately.

We believe' these should be addressed by additions to the. regulatory guide.

"Granafathering" should not be transferable from one plant to another.

~ Any foreign, as well as domestic, military service records.

should be queried as a part of background investigations.

Limitations should be placed on back-to-back temporary au-thorizations so they do not become a subterfuge for avoiding the effort of obtaining regular authorizations.

v-

QP;.?

)

r y c.;.

53 _id W l

YU

-F

$y The Honorable Kenneth M. Carr December 19, 1989; a

~

There should be:some control on the reauthorization or access

• J after an individual-returns from a leave of= absence. We were told that. such control exists in HUMARC's guidance to its g

guidelines, but. it is apparent that ~ the-NRC - staff. doesi not know how such control is to be implemanted..

The regulatory guide and the NUMARC guidelines should not be used

.~

as if triey -_are. detailed, prescriptive requirements, for purposes of '

/

inspection and enforcement.

L*

' Additional comments by ACRS Member W.'Kerr are presented below.

n<

Sincerely, e

_ b.v Carlyle Michelson h

Acting Chairman l

LAdditional Comments by ACRS Member W. Kerr i

I agree that efforts to ensure the trustworthiness of those having unrestricted L access. to plant vital areas and protected areas will probably _ decrease risk.

And I recognize that. pressure from Congress c

probablyn dictates that there be.a rule.

Under the circumstances, I applaud-the ~ NRC staff for_ formulating a rule' that is not overly pre-scriptive.

However, I observe that the guidelines that will probably become a de facto rule are themselves very prescriptive.- Since everyone seems - to agree that methods to evaluate-trustworthiness are subject to large uncertainty, I would urge. that those who will eventually be responsible b

for enforcing this rule recognize that a variety of approaches may be effective and evaluate compliance accordingly.

References:

1.-

Draft SECY Paper dated November 6, 1989 for the Commissioners from James M. Taylor, Acting Executive Director for Operations,

Subject:

i

).

Access Authorization Program for Nuclear Power Plants, with attach-i ments, including Draft. Regulatory Guide 5.XX, " Access Authorization Program for Nuclear Power. Plants."

2.

Nuclear Management and Resources Council, _Inc.,

NUMARC-89-01, h

" Industry Guidelines for Nuclear Power Plant Access Authorization Programs," dated August 1989, i

p

.