ML20134F537

Partially Withheld Insp Rept 50-461/96-16 on 961216-970107 (Ref 10CFR73.21).Violations Noted.Major Areas Inspected: Plant Support Activities Relative to Physical Protection of Facility

ML20134F537
Person / Time
Site:	Clinton
Issue date:	02/04/1997
From:	NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III)
To:
Shared Package
ML20134F536	List: ML20134F534 ML20134F537
References
50-461-96-16, NUDOCS 9702100024
Download: ML20134F537 (2)

See also: IR 05000461/1996016

Text

___ _ . . - . . .. - - - . .- -- --- - -- - - - --

. -

V .

'i

, 3

U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

REGION III

Docket No: 50-461

License No: NPF-62

Report No: 50-461/96016(DRS)

Licensee: Illinois Power Company

Facility: Clinton Power Station

l

!

Location: Clinton, Illinois

i

.

Dates: Between December 16, 1996 and

,

January 7, 1997

l

Inspector: Terry J. Madeda

h

Physical Security Inspector

i

a

,

'

Approved by: James R. Creed, Chief

,

Plant Support Branch 1

Division of Reactor Safety

l

!

!

i

i

i

d

i

b

! .

! l

.

En Contains

I s N TICE tains

I

Upon Sepa is TICS

,'g] Deoontt

4

4

9702100024 970204

PDR ADOCK 05000461

G PDR

s

. >

-

.g

~

.

'::c

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Clinton Nuclear Power Station

NRC Inspection Report 50-461/96016

This inspection included our review of plant support activities relative to

the physical protection of your facility. The report covered our initial

review of your vehicle protection program and routine review of your physical

security program to include audits; protected area detection equipment; alarm

stations and communications; testing, maintenance and compensatory measures;

security training and qualifications; and follow up on previous inspection

findings. The inspection was conducted between December 16, 1996, and

January 7, 1997.

• Security performance was adequate.

.

The performance of security intrusion and surveillance equipment was

observed to be very reliable. Security management was aggressive in

resolving issues identified during this inspection.

.

The security program was challenged in the areas of package control,

vital area personnel access control, and implementation of compensatory

measures. Violations involving the failure to properly control packages

in the protected area (Section S4.b.1) and the failure to properly

control personnel access authorization to a vital area (Section S4.b.2) j

were identified by the inspector. Another violation, which was licensee j

t

identified, involved two examples of failure to implement compensatory

measures in an appropriate manner (Section S4.b.3) was determined to be

a non-cited violation.

Also of concern was an inspector-identified vulnerability in the vehicle ,

barrier system that was missed during several " walk downs" by your  ;

security and engineering staff (Section S8.1.b.1).

Despite the fact that full credit was given for your identification of

two of four violations, the basis failure to adhere to established  !

procedures was common to all.

1

i

!

!

l

)

1

2