ML20008F738
| ML20008F738 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Trojan File:Portland General Electric icon.png |
| Issue date: | 04/20/1981 |
| From: | Clark R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Mccorkle G NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8104210620 | |
| Download: ML20008F738 (2) | |
Text
TE M 8[f ug A
UNITED STATES
{,hv('i,E NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION p
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555
+ [,,#,, #
April 20, 1981 e
v MEMORANDUM FOR:
George W. McCorkle, Chief
'6 Physical Security Licensing Branch
,p $ %
Division of Safeguards, NMSS 4
h p
FROM:
Robert A. Clark, Chief S
g Operating Reactors Branch #3 g\\\\s Division of Licensing, NRR
SUBJECT:
KEY AND LOCK CONTROL AT TROJAN NUCLEAR PLANT This is in response to your memorandum of March 13, 1981, wherein you documented your acceptance of Revision 5 to PGE's physicai security plan and asked that changes be made to this security plan with respect to key and lock control.
Based on discussions with both PGE and C. Gaskin on April 16, 1981, we understand that your concerns with respect to key and lock control are not related to the changes PGE has requested in Revision 5 to their plan.
In other words, PGE has not requested changes to their approved plan with respect to this matter, and therefore the approval of Revision 5 to their plan is separable from the changes you desire be made regarding key and lock control. On this basis, then, we proposed to proceed with issuance of an amendment to PGE's license approving Revision 5 to their physical security plan. This was discussed with you and C. Trammell of my staff on April 16, and you indicated that this approach was acceptable to you.
As a separate matter, then, we aould like to assist you in achieving the desired changes in key and lock control.
Since PGE's physical security plan provisions for changing keys, locks, combinations, etc. was perceived to satisfy the provisions of 10 CFR 73.55(d)(9) when the plan was originally approved on February 27, 1979, we need more information than is offered in your March 13 memorandum in order to proceed.
In that regard, we request that you provide an explanation of the fault you find in the currently approved method for lock and key control, and the changes you desire to be made together with an ex-planation of the need for the changes.
We would then have the information needed to pursue this matter with PGE.
8 10421 0610
b 2
In a conference call with PGE on this subject on April 16, PGE indicated that it would be helpful if the terms " employee" and " termination of employment" as used in 73.55(d)(9) could be more clearly defined..
Anything you could offer on this would probably be of assistance in resolving this matter.
Robert A. Clark, Chief Operating Reactors Branch #3 Division of Licensing cc:
J. R. Miller C. Gaskin C. Trammell e
i j
.,-.c.c_.._
.-_.m
.._..,_m 4-.
r....,
m.,_
_m..
c,
.,-,.m
,,,-