ML20205P493

Discusses Allegation RIII-96-A-0090 Re Bar Code

ML20205P493
Person / Time
Site:	Cook
Issue date:	08/30/1996
From:	Schrum D NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III)
To:	Funk D NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III)
Shared Package
ML20205P063	List: ML20205P059 ML20205P076 ML20205P164 ML20205P195 ML20205P216 ML20205P229 ML20205P305 ML20205P459 ML20205P467 ML20205P480 ML20205P493
References
FOIA-99-76 NUDOCS 9904200195
Download: ML20205P493 (9)

Text

.

From: Darrell L. Schrum _ (DLS3) ifI f To: DEF 77 'C < P UMK , I U Date: Friday, August 30,1996 1:00 pm. .

Subject:

D.C. Cook Allegation on Bar Code Hi Don...This memo is per your request... ORS concluded that no additional actions are -

required for this allegation and 01 does not need to take additional actions. Please include this allegation in the September 9th ALB for close-out.

CC: RNG l

,, h 9904200195 990414 V 3'

PDR FOIA OUNTER99-76 PDR m. .

fk$f[JD/f5

ALLEGATION ACTION PLAN .

ALLEGATION NO.-.RITI-96-A-0090 t

' Licensee: 'D.C. Cook-Docket / License No: 50-315(316)-

Assigned Division: DRS Attached Pertinent Documents: OI report of interview [ 8 f 3 = {i(, D -

Sc kr6 m mce-I. Division Action Qfp 9/6/96 A. Prepared by: Donald E. Funk Jr.

Technical Staff Date B. Approved by:

Branch Chief Date.

II. Alleaation Review Board Membershin: b h" Q < TJ ~ o E T. S p..w - b R P '2- - P- - ( M Q . (3 g n . n "

f. C H . W c I IG "Q Y D. I b l( ~ O A-C D . $ch r u e ' DRS III. Remarks 7 N e'e s / s r - D R.I Safety Significance: HIGH MEDIUM NA-

/ Y/ApprovedAsIs

/ / Approved with Modifications as Documented in Plan.

./ / Disapproved for.Following Reasons:

Q/ 01. (Priority: HIGH'

/_ / NORMAL LOW .)

Yes No:

i th:

, qi g I'

. .Al .1 ation Teview Board Chairman Date

' gasb.12 -m 02 : 01P DC f 4< 03 4G5-3727 P . O-( [

\

[ g [ _,

, . I

_ O / d$

s. -

~~~

on tion Report Nusaber 8, # 07k Part A '

p rted By Larry Smead e /

/ .

_7 Deparunen'/Section _ Plant Protect 1 he me sw

. port Date 5-13-96 1114 me of Condition _5-11-96 f Unit Affected: b1 02 sois O N/A gpf Condition IdestfDestion and Descrippros j Descripdon of Condidon: On 5-11-96. a Fire Tour of Unit 1 CRT was being conducted in accordance with T.S. 3.7.10. At 1114 hours0.0129 days <br />0.309 hours <br />0.00184 weeks <br />4.23877e-4 months <br />, the tour of fir er identified the Ba- ,

which was placed on the inner side of Door 333 was missing. Subsequent investir identified the Bar Code had been moved, and placed on the back side of the door Nh closure between the closure and door on a small area which without close investw p could not have been seen. The Bar Code was origina11 located at e eval, cer' f

the door. Securit com uter transactions identif f at:

as eing in the area. A phone call was se e to the tro on a gr e n Bar C om and

. ter f n t Bs,  %]

se told he bad been identiffed as beine in the n 1 e oken with. Whe.

T area, he stated he had -

(

(

c e Ear Code. When asked why, he stated he had just moved it, and g ,.

(

Method of Disc, Tour being performed in accordance with Tech Spec 3.7.10. $

. O Co.am. -

laun:diate Action Taken: Call made to Fire Protection Supervisor to have Bar Code reolaced. Seirch for original Bar Code and ir vestigation initiated. _ _ _

Condow' Outage Management Notified: b N/A Originator's Su;v.rvisor Review: / r-/r -/Z )

o Supervisor's Cornrnents: This eve e,lapacts on the credibility and trustworthiness of_ _ j

_ the individual involved as a nuclear Dlant worker. Further investigation shoul.

performed to determine if continued unescorted access should be granted. _ i A&&n/ A M & 2 % a yCL / fg. -

Referescas l Reference Documents: i QA/NSDRC Audit /Sury. Number NRC faW- Repon/ Finding Huseber Vfi-4aafs) Tech Spec 3.7.10 Procedure Number (s) PMI 2270 Drawing Number (s) .

I Design Change Number -

1 JO Number -

Purchase Order -

Code / Standard 10 CFR 73.71, (1) (5) __

Other (i.e.. Previous PRa or CRs, etc.) -

Equipment Involved: b Ye. O No

'""ET'S*"""" " """'*" E"!C" "*"%s l  ? l

/2/Y n.,

- 1

. 7c g w.n 37 m6 i \

, .3tj a;12 C0 02:01P DC C K G1 GC5-3727 _P.03 --

., 4 f.

i .

Page 2 of 2 Continuation of Part A Description of Condition: -

J offered no further information.

%).

admitted to deliberately moving a Bar Code which was being used to verify k lecion and compliance with Tech Spec 3.7.10. Moreover, when questioned. \

e ating edeliberately knew nothing and willfully of the event.obstructed a security invsstigation by originally %[-

x i

l 1

4 l

l

~

ALLEGATION ACTION PLAN ALLEGATION NO. RIII-96-A-0090 s

• Licensee: D.C. Cook, Indiana Michigan Power Company Docket / License No: 50-315; 5-316 Assigned Division: Division of Reactor Safety ,

Attached Pertinent Documents: Copy ~ of Condition Report #96-9778 I. Division Action A. Prepared by: N. Sb 6[h%

Date Darrell hrum B. Approved by: ~ 8b Ronald Gardner, Engineering Date Specialist 2 Branch II. Alleaation Review Board Membershio: D E u n K ""~ O A C T. Grobo T N cAc A k Iva r el e t r' C . L.A) e d k ~~"* O C Z. . C I < dC - O G c_

111.

w . Mc w143-ar Remarks

~/~. Po/ c. h ~ D ( h

& NM. l

@buJ4r m p 4rapu e n Lay ,

bas .

Safety Significance: HIGH MEDIUM NA i

/ / Approved As Is (

5\

/ 1 / Approved with Modifications as' Documented in Plan.

/ / Disapproved for Following Reasons:

~ ~ ' '

/ 01 (Priority: HIGH NORMAL LOW .)

Y' QL fAL 6 \

~

ukhs Date / '

ation Review Board Chairman

3. Ti oeriod to be covered: 'Several oths of fire watch logs-ano security data should be reviezeu.

4. Locations / specific areas to visit: Plant specific areas covered by fire watches and . area where fire watch

. logs / security data are ava.ilable for_ review.

5. Other~ areas (specify): None.

11/94 OAC Allegation No. RIII-96-A-0090

-i

,d 1

Peripheral Issue No. .

Are the licensee's corrective actions effective in preventing missed fire watches?

Two years ago D.C. Cook had significant problems with missed fire watches.

Approximately 20 fire watches were fired during the year for performance issues which included deliberately missing areas during their fire watch tours.

1. Action Evaluation: The following method of resolution is recommended (circle):

A. Send to Licensee Requesting Response in Days with Rill Followup

• B. Priority Rill Followup C. Followup During Routine Inspection Within 60 Days D. Followup with Assistance from 01 E. No Action - Outside NRC's Charter (describe basis below)

F. No Action - Without Merit (describe basis below)

G. Refer to H. Other (specify)

• If the proposal is to send to the licensee, the Action Plan should describe the general areas we expect the licensee to address.

11. Inspector's Actioni: The following areas at a minimum will be reviewed during the inspection into the above mentioned concern and/or peripheral issue.

A. Ob.iective and methods the same as listed in Concern #1.

1 l

I Peripheral ! Issue' No. -

Are there additional ' examples- of. wrong doing by fire watches? .

The following method of resolution is recommended'

~

I. Action Evaluation:

(circle):- .

A. Send to Licensee Requesting Response-in Days with RIII Followup *

'B. . Priority RIII Followup C. Followup During Routine Inspection Within 60 Days D. Followup with Assistance'from 01 E. No Action - Outside NRC's Charter -(describe basis below)

F. No Action - Without Merit (describe basis below)

G. Refer to H. Other (specify)

• If'the proposal is to send to the licensee, the Action Plan should describe the general areas we expect the licensee to address.

II. Inspector's Actions: The following areas at a minimum will be reviewed during the inspection into the above mentioned-concern and/or peripheral issue.

A. Ob.iective and methods the same as listed-in Concern #1.

- A__ J GATION/ PERIPHERAL ISSUE ACTION ,LAN

~

. - Concerns and any periphsral issues associated with a concern should be documented on a separate page. Each concern and peripheral issue, if any, should be documented in the followup report as is stated in this plan. If there are several concerns in one area, one page can be used. Otherwise, a separate page should be used for each concern.

, Concern No. 1 .

1. Deliberately moving a bar code which was being used to verify fire watch tour completion and compliance with Tech Spec 3.7.10. ,

2. Deliberately and willfully obstructed a security investigation.  %

l 0 f

On May 11,1996, the licensee identified that a bar code used for scanning during fire watch tours had been moved from the area requir d to 'e' toured to the 4g opposite side of a door.which was another fire area. [ originally lied x about moving the bar code but later admitted that he had movec the bar code.

I. Action Evaluation: The following method of resolution is recommended (circle):

A. Send to Licensee Requesting Response in Days with RIII Followup *

8. Priority RIII followup .

i C. Followup During Routine Inspection Within 60 Days

>>>>>>D. Followup with Assistance from OI E. No Action - Outside NRC's Charter (describe basis below)

F. No Action - Without Merit (describe basis below)

G. Refer to H. Other (specify)

• If the proposal is to send to the licensee, the Action Plan should describe the general areas we expect the licensee to address.

II. Inspector's Actions: The following areas at a minimum will be reviewed during the inspection into the above mentioned concern and/or peripheral issue.

A. Ob.iective: An inspection of the fire watch program to verify that the licensee reviewed the plant security data to see if other fire watcher. were missed. Inspector review of fire watch logs and plant security data to identify other examples of missed fire watches (wrong doing). Interview and accompany fire watches on their rounds to assess their understanding of D.C. Cook management expectat .

Assess if new fire watches are being properly trained for r q d s. Identify what actions the licensee has taken agains

- for wrong doing. Identify what additional licensee correc ive i actions were taken to ensure that other fire watches do not 0 -(a deliberately niiss areas during their fire w > ', tours.

D. Methods

1. Persons to be contacted: Fire Pr election Manager, fire Watch Supervisors, and Fire Watches. l

2. Doc aments and/or activities to be reviewed: Review plant l security data and fire watch logs. Interview the fire protection . staff and accompany fire watches on their rounds.

i