ML20206E997

EDO Control of Rulemaking Package Re 10CFR73, Search of Individuals at Power Reactor Facilities. Continuation of Rulemaking Approved

ML20206E997
Person / Time
Issue date:	06/28/1985
From:	Dircks W NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO)
To:	Jennifer Davis NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS)
References
NUDOCS 8606240076
Download: ML20206E997 (54)

Text

'

JLNI 2 81985 MEMORANDUM FOR: John G. Davis, Director Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards FROM: William J. Dircks Executive Director for Operations

SUBJECT:

CONTROL OF NRC RULEMAKING By memorandum of February 13, 1984, " Control of NRC Rulemaking by Offices Reporting to the EDO," Offices were directed that effective April 1, 1984, (1) all offices under EDO purview must obtain my approval to begin and/or cort.inue a specific rulemaking, (2) resources were not to be expended on rule-makings that have not been approved, and (3) RES would independently review rulemaking proposals fomarded for my approval and make recoffftendations to me concerning whether or not and how to proceed with the rulemakings.

In accordance with my directive, the following proposal concerning rulemaking has been fomarded for my approval.

Proposed revision of 10 CFR Part 73, " Search of Individuals at Power Reactor Facilities." (Sponsored by NMSS - memorandum, Minogue to E00 dated June 6, 1985.)

I approve continuation of this rulemaking. The NRC Regulatory Agenda (NUREG-0936) should be modified to reflect the status of this rulemaking.

(Siped) William J.Direks William J. Dircks Executive Director for Operations cc: V. Stello J. Roe H. R. Denton J. Taylor R. B. Minogue g62go76eso62s 73 l P. G. Norry PDR I

Distribution:

WJDircks tJH_Sniezek VStello Echwink

, JPhilips JHenry ED0 rf Central File DEDR0GR cf

RO

/D :DE) b.] :EDO A

OFC :ROGR/S

- ..__.:_.... ...__ .______:_. p/

l NAME :WS chw nk  : zek :VS St :WDirc s  :  :  :

...__ : ..f L ________ : . U L , :__ ________:.___ .__..__:......______: __________

DATE :6/26/85 :6/ : __h, 85:6/h./85 :6/[_/85  :  :

NMSAs n ~ wtw

[""%

• UNITED STATES

[ NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [hL g j WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555

,s JUN 6 1985

! ~

William J..Dircks MEMORANDUM FOR:

Executive Director for Operations N'. ,

FROM:- Robert B.'Minogue, Director Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research h

SUBJECT:

CONTROL 0F NRC RULEMAKING: Ru INDEPENDENT REVIEW 0F ONG0ING RULEMAKING SPONSORED BY NMSS 4

, Based on our independent review of ongoing rulemaking, " Searches of Individuals '

at Power Reactor Facilities" (10 CFR Part 73), sponsored by NMSS, RES recommends that this rulemaking effort should continue. The basis for our recomendation is as follows.

This proposed rule is a part of.the Insider Rule Package, along with the Access Authorization Rule and the Miscellaneous Amendments concerning Physical Protection of Nuclear Power Plants. All three proposed rules were published i

together on August 1, 1984 for public comment because of their marked

interrelationship. The public comment period ended on March 7, 1985 and the staff is currently analyzing the comments.

plans,

' require Currentthat searchregular regulations, employees be which aretoincorporated subject either a physical in licensee search security (pat-down 4

or an equipment search (metal and explosive detector), whereas visitors are subject to both pat-down and equipment searches. According to NMSS, as substantiated by several government agencies (e.g.,-the Justice Department and Department of Defense), the use of pat-down searches have been proven to be not as effective as equipment searches when used on a routine basis. A pat-down i- search is primarily intended to be a quick cursory search for weapons of

moderate size and bulk concealed in or-under the clothing and was never intended

to be a technique for the detection of concealed explosives. . Correct techniques are rarely employed by individuals ccnducting pat-down searches. As a result,

! the pat-down search of all employees, executives,-and visitors at a nuclear i

power plant would certainly create hostility and a poor public relations image l which will probably in turn result in poor searching. In fact, objections were

, raised against the use of pat-down searches by unions, individuals employees, utilit 73-2) yismanagement, pending against andthemembers of Congress, use of pat-down and a Therefore, searches. petition for the rulemaking staff is (PRM revising the search requirements for individuals entering the protected areas of nuclear power plants by limiting the option of a pat-down search to use as a

compensatory measure and clarifying the procedure for equipment searches for all

! individuals entering the protected area. Provisions are also proposed to exempt bona-fide federal, state, and local law enforcement personnel on official duty-and to require pat-down searches only when the licensee has cause to suspect -

that individual.is attempting to introduce firearms, explosives, or incendiary devices to a protected area, or when the portals are out of service. Licensees ,

will also be required to submit revisions to their security plans defining how L final search requirements will be met, therefore, standardizing licensee search procedures at all sites.

, s v~ w -, vs,- -wwe, ,rw,r

,,,---,--r, ,+r w,--,,me-,--,, ,--,,,,,,-r-w, < -ww m,,m,, ,-----a, -- e v ,,ww--~, ~ + w

. w William J. Dircks 2 JUN 6 1985 Since licensees already possess the necessary equipment for an equipment search, this proposed rule will affect licensee procedures at negligible cost, requiring only e minor amendment to their security plan. The impact on NRC operations will occur in the area of licensing review of amended licensee security plans.

Initial cost _to the NRC is estimated to be $46,100 and estimated annual cost in subsequent years is $5,800.

Since requirements for searches have been in effect for some time, and modifications to those requirements are needed, alternatives to this rulemaking such as revised guidance would be inappropriate in that they would not carry the force of a regulation.

The Director of NMSS recommended continuation of this rulemaking. l The complete RES independent review package has been sent to OED0 (Attention:

DEDROGR) and to the Director, NMSS.

\ ,

Robert B. Minogue, Director Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research

F este

_.__ ROUTING AND TRANSRAff7AL SUP JUN 6 1985 m emes.,m.n. em r. l . a.

Assasy/ Pest) , -

3. 0600 (O' OEDgosa.)

~

a s A$c

/ ).\

~

(D

4. i e,

=me. rue Note w,e.m r cio-o.a. e.,ca.se.eems.

= no o e r c m esse. e.e.e Rom, Cheulate X ror '3's.r facess.euen see Ise Domment inwa Algete Signetw. -

t -f_ Jess':fy ggs g.L a w=+ u Ab 1 a ,,,,

nw q zkAvA J 5 aun- y f v*A -'%

w p & ,"(PA*73). ,

A.

j&y NM?S j W^. ~~ 2 , c;'t ' ~ ~ ~ ~

cQyA@P g n ... a Af D .

o

00 NOT ves this form se a ItEC0ftD of appe. vole, eenc venees, alleposele, efeerences, and similar acuene FROBA- (Neme, org. symbol, Agency /Peet) Room No.-BIsig.

U

'RAMR8,R65 emo e No.

Y v3 - 76/ Y essa-see OPTIONAL FOAbd 41 (Iter. 7-76) i w

e umo.:m:1529/4tt ' d $ .11.3OS --

i i

l l

1

)

l

f'_ pQy  :. . .:.. - -  %

=..

. - .m z-..  ; z: :.

= .

A e='

IEM0 RAND (at FOR: William J. Dircks JUN 6 1985

. Executive Director for Operations FROM: Robert 8. Minogue Direct.cr i Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research

SUBJECT:

CONTROL OF NRC RULEMAKING: RES INDEPENDENT f; REVIEW 0F ONGOING RULEMAKING SPONSORED BY IMSS J Based on our independent review of ongoing rulemaking, " Searches of Individuals en at Power Reactor Facilities" (10 CFR Part 73), sponsored by NMSS, RES recommends that this rulemaking effort should continue. The basis for our reconnendation i is as follows.

This proposed rule is a part of the Insider Rule Package, along with the Access Authorization Rule and the Miscellaneous Amendments concerning Physical Protection of Nuclear Power Plants. All three proposed rules were published together on August 1, 1984 for public comument because of their marked interrelationship. The public comment period ended on March 7, 1985 and the staff is currently analyzing the comuments.

Y plans, ,'

Current require that search regular regulations, employees which be subjectare incorporated to either a physical in licensee search security (pat-down) or an equipment search (metal end explosive detecter), whereas visitors are c4 subject to both pat-down and equipment searches. According to IMSS, as substantiated by several government agencies (e.g., the Justice Department and Department of Defense), the use of pat-down searches have been proven to be not

. as effective as equipment searches when used on a routine basis. A pat-down -

search is primarily intended to be a quick cursory search for weapons of moderate size and bulk concealed in or under the clothing and was never intended l i- to be a technique for the detection of concealed explosives. Correct techniques -

U are rarely employed by indivikth conducting pat-down searches. As a result,

( the pat-down search of all glo. tees, executives, and visitors at a nuclear power plant would certaidy e e bostility and a poor public relations image

. which will probably in '.ttu W t in poor searching. In fact, objections were y raised against the use of pat-oc searches by unions, individuals employees, l4 utility management, and members of Congress, and a petition for rulemaking (PRM r.- 73-2) is pending against the use of pat-down searches. Therefore, the staff is M revising the search requirements for individuals entering the protected areas of T nuclear power plants by limiting the option of a pat-down search to use as'a F compensatory measure and clarifying the procedure for equipment searches for all 6 individuals entering the protected area. Provisions are also proposed to exempt g bona-fide federal, state, and local law enforcement personnel on official duty 7 and to require pat-down searches only when the licensee has cause to suspect E that individual is attempting to introduce firearns, explosives, or incendiary 7 devices to a protected area, or when the portals are out of service. Licensees k,*'

will also be required to submit revisions to their security plans defining how

, final cearch ranniramants will ha mot. tForefnre. etani artlivinn lico, coa conech f ame= procedures at all sites.

.~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. ..

H

[, ===.==>

• "=>

, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A.

s,... . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

wr.c ronu na no-soi Nacu ono OFFICIAL RECORD COPY

s c _ _. -.w:  : D-_ 1.,1% . , q ~ ~:: ~,:' ~ ' ~~' ~ :'"~ ~. '~ .

=- .. - .

e. William J. Dircks 2 Fe JUN 6 E95 Wt fn Since licensees already possess the necessary equipment for an equipment search, this proposed rule will affect licensee procedures at negligible cost, requiring

.I only a minor amendment to their security plan. The impact on NRC operations r will occur in the area of licensing review of amended licensee sesarity plans.

Initial cost to the NRC is estimated to be $46.100 and estimated annual cost in j

subsequent years is $5.800.

3 L Since requirements for searches have been in effect for some time, and

' }- modifications to those requirements are needed, alternatives to this rulemaking E. such as revised guidance would be inappropriate in that they would not carry the

!4 force of a regulation.

The Director of NMSS recommended continuation of this rulemaking.

< The complete RES independent review package has been sent to OEDO (Attention:

DEDR0GR) and to the Director, NMSS.

s-(h r p

% ert B. Minogue, Director Z4 .. Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research 4

DISTRIBUTION:

T RMinogue

[ Dross 1 FGillespie

'L MErnst

! ( JNorberg

, PTing y KJamgochian .

t KJamgochian/rdg

HFSG/subj g HFSG/rdg I

4[- , . /\ /)! /

w

"c'> .....HESGB:DIU0. . . N B:h0 ..~. SGB DRA0 -..DD/DRA0tRE S- /-  : j~~0D/RES-~~ D/R -~~

• • ""^"*> . ....KJ,a,mgg,c h,i a,n,,,N, Pj,i,14,g,,,, , , , , , , N, 4,Wr ,,,,,MrJ)At...... .. . i].1e 1o. . . . . D h ss. ... . . . . .. . . RMi nog ue. . .

• • • > ....sjh85.-. .-. 5/2185-~. .--sp.yes.--. .--5)-/85-.- ~ ~ . 5/ 65 - "- 5f "I85 "-

nrcex.

u. no..o unc=o2' OFFICIAL RECORD COPY ,

m u-

' ?-

4 -

u 5_ .

1..

O e

'E T'

s

?:

RES INDEPENDENT REVIEW PACKAGE l

n -

$[-

E I

t RES INDEPENDENT REVIEW BOARD V0 TING SHEET TO: F. P. GILLESPIE, CHAIRMAN, RIRB FROM: K. R. Goller, Member, RIRB UTI.E OF RULEMAKING: Searches of Individuals at Power Reactor Facilities (Part 73) i REQUEST RIRB

~

/ AGREE WITH RECOMENDATIONS IN RES RULEMAKING REVIEW MEETING.

PACKAGE ___

e MODIFY RECOMENDATIONS IN NOT PARTICIPATING *

-- RES RULEMAKING REVIEW

"~ ~

PACKAGE AS INDICATED BELOW CO MENTS AND SUGGESTIONS:

s l ,

N h,o MEPEER, RIRB 4'/23/7s~

DATE G6

W N w

~

'g RES INDEPENDENT REVIEW BOARD h VOTING SHEET .

i TO: F. P. GILLESPIE. CHAIRMAN RIRB

.t '

~

FROM: G. A. Arlotto. Member RIRB TITLE OF RULEMAKING: Searches of Individuals at Power Reactor Facilities (Part 73)

,~

f i REQUEST RIRB l

AGREE WITH RECOMENDATIWS MEETING.

IN RES RULEMAKING REVIEW PACKAGE

-t

• MODIFY REC 000E:NDATIONS IN NOT PARTICIPATING.

~1 RES RULEMAKING REVIEW 3 PACKAGE AS INDICATED BELOW t Col #4ENTS AND SUGGESTIONS:

s

\,

8

( U 1 aaLFTb MEM ER RIRB a.

2h DATE t -

4 ,_ . ___ ___ _ __. . - - --

y .

g:, ._

p r

& RES INDEPENDEM l.EYlEk' BOARD i . Y0TINGSHEET TO: F. P. GILLESPIE, CHAIRMAN, RIRB FROM: W. M. Morrison, Member, RIRB TITLE OF RULEMAKING: Searches of Individuals at power Reactor Facilities (Part 73)

REQUEST RIRB AGREE WITH RECOMMENDATIONS x MEETING.

IN RES RULEMAKING REVIEW PACKAGE MODIFY RECOMMENDATIONS IN NOT PARTICIPATING

• RES RULEMAKING REVIEW

~~ i PACKAGE AS INDICATED BELOW COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS:

I disagree with a number of statements included in the draft Minogue to Dircks memorandum including the following:

1. The draft memorandum states that paragraph 73.55 (d) (1) applies to employees only, as stated in the introduction to paragraph 73.55.

I do not agree that this introduction states that it applies only to employees.

2. The draft memorandum states that "NRR issued a Review Guideline #23, stating that a ' pat-down' search will be required of all other '

visitors entering the protected area." I am not familiar with an NRR Review Guideline and I could not find any other reference to i

l this Guideline in the RIRB package, but I doubt that it has the force of a regulation such that it can require " pat-down" searches.

(Please continue on next page.)

[

'Vt4Wm W. M. MORRIS 0N MEMBER, RIRB APRIL 26, 1985 DATE l

I

-- +--we-* .ww-. . - . m

in RIRB Ballot Continued -

2- April 26,1985 4-. (Searches of Individuals at

- Power Reactor Facilities r (Part 73) )

3. The draft memorandum indicates that alternatives to this rulemaking such as revised guidance would be inappropriate in that they would not carry the force of a regulation. I cannot find any regulation that now requires a " pat-down" search; therefore, it is not apparent why rulemaking is needed to revise a practice which appears to be promulgated by a guidance dccument. As I read the current regulation, licensees are given the option of performing the search function by a physical search or by the use of equipment, which is not significantly different from that proposed in the present rulemaking.

A wp 4

O r

s e

W=

, _ _ . - - - . ,, y - - - - . _ --

y - - - - -

1 g -. .~

t. -

cx- .

E ,

r i

? . .

C '

ROUTING AND TRANSMITTAL SUP R1.31995~

m (Nemo. emse symbef mee awnber, telhels Date 6mmnas. Agency /reet;

1. W. M. Morrison, Member, RIRE >

g, K. R. Goller, Member, RIRB

a. G. A. Arlotto, itember, RIRB -

a F. P. Gillespie, Chainnan, RIRB s.

1 Action F5e Note and Retum Approwel For Cleerence Per Converesteen As 1 _ For correction proom nepw cerculate For Veur leformation Seetie C:- . :^ towestigste Signature 21__^ _ _ . . Justik l- are ananna wFA % 9 w(f M 73)

We are at step III.C.2, RIRB deliberations, of.the -

RES independent review procedures for the attached specific ongoing rulemaking sponsored by NA155 Please evaluate the . attached dra'ft independent review package and provide RAllRB with your' voting sheet indicating your, position on the rulemaking. .

Your response by c.o.b. NAY 1 ~25 will assist in RES' making independent recommendations to the EDO in a timely manner.

DO 100T use this form as a REo0RD of approvals, eencurrences, afisposals, clearonees, and similar actions FR004. (Nor% erg. symber, Agency / Post) fleem No.-44ds.

RAMRB staff enen. No.

443-7885 seen-ter OmONAL FOftti 41 (Rev. 7-76)

, e cro: sees o - ses-s n u m m a-11Jes

5. ..

g.

m- \

h j T l

? l n

4 i

y-e-

4

+-

DRAFT RES INDEPENDENT REVIEW PACKAGE

s. , . .-

.t r

A L

3' i

i MEMORArDUM FOR: William J. Dircks Exocutive itirector for Operati s FR0".: Robert B. Minogue. Director Office of Nuclear Regula y Research

$UBJECT: CONTROL 0F NRC RULEMA G: RES INDEPENDENT REVIEW OF ONGOING RU lAKING SPONSORED BY N".SS

+

Jy T Based on our independent review of igning rulemaking, " Searches of Individuals ij at Power Reactor Fac111 tics" (10 Part 73), sponsored by NMSS, RES recommends that this rulemaking effort shou continue. The basis for our reconnendation

, is as follows.

3-

, This proposed rule is a part f the Insider Rule Package, along with the Access R

Authorization Rule and the .iscellaneous Amendments concerning Physical Protection of Nuclear Pow Plants. All 3 proposed Rules were published together on August 1, 1984 for pu ic comment because of their marked interrelationship.

The public comment peri d ended on March 7,1985 and the staff is currently

'r analyzing the comment The proposed rule ises the search requirements for individuals entering the protected area of clearpowerplants,573.55(d)(1). Currently, employees are required to be s rehed either physically (pat-down) or by equipment (metal detectors and e losive detectors). Since 173.55 (d)(1) applies to employees only, a stat in the introduction to 173.55, NRR issued a Review Guideline

1. 23 stating at a " pat-down" search will be required of all other visitors

.. entering the rotected area. The staff is now proposing that all persons entering t protected area, with an exception to on-duty law enTorcement -

officers, e searched by equipment searches only. " Pat-down" searches would be required nly when the licensee has cause to suspect that an individual is attempt g to introduce contraband (firearms, explosives,(ol incendiaries) or # ^

when t . detection equipment is out of service. This propssed amendment would also lete outstanding action on industry petitions pending since 1977 which

~

are ainst the use of " pat-down" searcht.s of individuals for norn:al, routine ope tions.

.m=>

==>

.... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9., .. . .. .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . * *.

n:c romu ese no-soi Nacu ono OFFICIAL RECORD COPY

= _ _- __-

w W

y _

2:

+

5

{ William J. Dircks 2 7

r Since licensees already possess the necessary equipment for equipment search,

~_

thisproposedrulewillaffectlicenseeproceduresatneglJgiblecost, requiring only a minor amendment to their security plan. The impact on NRC operations will occur in the area of licensing review of amended Jfeensee security plans.

Initial cost to the NRC is estimated to be $46,100 a,nd estimated annuel cost in subsequent years is $5,800.

p Since requirements for searches have been in eff'ect for some time, and modifications to those requirements are need.ed, alternatives to this rulemaking such as revised guidance would be inapprop ate in that they would not carry the force of a regulation.

/

The Director of NMSS recommended confinuation of this rulemaking.

2 The com lete RES independent revia.w package has been sent to OEDO (Attention:

DEDR03R and to the Director, N S.

~

i Robert B. Minogue, Director g Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research

Enclosure:

RES Sunnary Sheet [ff Review  :

i DISTRIBUTION: - 1 RMinogue Dross FGillespie MErnst JNcrberg PTing KJamgochian -

KJamgochian/rdg HFSG/subj HFSG/rdg i

_ /1 .

,I

'"' c ' > ....BESSB:DRA 0...HF.NL: pRAQ

"'2"^"'> . ... 5d.amg o,c,h,1,an,;,g[,jp,g,,,,

... 0

, ,b e.r.g . . .

... D/DRAO:RE S M

.t. . . . . . I A0cRES . . . . DD/ RE S . . . . . .

btf4i .1espb . . . . .QRo ss . . . . . . . .

. .. 0/RES . . . ..

.. . . RMi nogue..

Y.

c '" > .... n & a 5... ....utnas... .....ayptss..... .....

...ie ..... uriss.... . . .. e . . . t8s . . . . . <1..1es ..

= mm si. . io..oi unc"

OFFICIAL RECORD COPY

09" "'I%,

UNITED STATES

, eg NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 g

%...../ ,

MAR 251985  !

C l MEMORANDUM FOR: J. A. Norberg, Chief '

Human Factors and Safeguards Branch, DRA0 FROM: F. P. Gillespie, Chairman RES Independent Review Board

SUBJECT:

CONTROL OF NRC RULEMAKING: RES INDEPENDENT '

REVIEW 0F ONG0ING RULEMAKING Enclosed is a rulemaking review package received from a sponsoring office for RES independent reivew. (Enclosure 1)

T '

In accordanc'e with procedures approved by the ED0 on May 30, 1984, the rulemaking review package is assigned to your branch for action. (Enclosure 2)

.~

The ED0-approved procedures allow a total of 20 working days for completing

the RES independent review. To assist RES in completing its independent review in a timely manner, please submit the draft independent review package for this specific rulemaking to RAMRB by 7 working days from the date of this memorandum.

d F. P. Gillespi , Chaiman RES Independent Review Board

Enclosures:

1. Searches of Individuals at Power Reactor Facilities

2. Procedures for Conducting RES Independent Review of l Rulemakings i

a e

Ms-. - ~--see.=ne+-m.-n w-m +~~u - -

s.me- ~-

K.. i lr .

2

'/

{

e Y'

OFFICE REVIEW PACKAGE RECEIVED FROM NMSS gwe, m.ame.N-Mh ._ . . - - . -

e 8

__,, _,,___emm-=~-w#~

.y.. . . - - ,.n...

y, =~

%, $g 94NHTED STATES fg

,#< c NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON. D. C. 20S55

, 4* ;* " j ,

, + .(

7

.,'. M I4 IS23 MEMORANDUM FOR: William J. Dircks Executive Director for Operations

~

FROM: John G. Davis, Director

. Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards >

SUBJECT:

CONTROL OF NRC RULEMAKING - EDO QUARTERLY REVIEW In response to your memorandum of February 13, 1984, and in accordance with instructions provided in subsequent memoranda from the Office of Nuclear Regu-latory Research (NRR), the Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards

& (NMSS) has reviewed the ongoing or proposed rulemaking activities listed in Attachment 1 to this memorandum. On the basis of our review, we recommend

._,. approval of continued activity on these rules, with the exception of "Certifi-cation of Industrial Radiographers" and " Shallow Land Disposal of Radioactive Waste". Staff efforts on these are now directed toward terminating the two rulemaking activities. -

Also, as directed by your memorandum and the subsequent instructions from RES, we have prepared Review Packages for all of the listed rulemaking activities.

These are included as attachments to this memorandum, with copies forwarded to RES and the other reviewing office . -

r- ,'

J hn G. Davis, Director Office of Nuclear Material Safety l and Safeguards -

i Attachments:

As stated bec: RES RM DRR e 9

1 w

IM hA..

E t

r v

i DIVISION OF SAFEGUARDS

" Searches of Individuals at Power Reactor Facilities (Part of .

InsiderPackage)"

Contact:

John Davidson 427-4708 35 1

O

• 9

• e -e- e .- - - -. . .w- mm ..._e __

e 4

c-~+m-me < ~ m.-~m.-~wsw -_.m, . ---. a. . . , _ ....

y -

. . . m..._...._. _

r

,s p..

W k

~

P 6

h W

- esp NRC REGULATORY AGENDA ENTRY G

S I

l e 6 1

1 1

h~

46 l f TITLE I Searches of Individuals at Power Reactor Facilities (Part of Insider Package)

Ts CFR CITATION:

L 10 CFR 73

, ABSTRACT:

The proposed rule would revise the search requirements for individuals entering the protected area of nuclear power plants. Under the proposed requirements, all persons would be subject to equipment searches for fireanns, explosives and incendiary, devices. Physical searches would be required only when search

. equipment is not working properly or when the licensee suspects that an individual is attempting to carry into the plant prohibited devices or material.

Random searches were considered as an alternative, but were deemed to be possibly disruptive. Since licensees already possess the necessary equipment, this rule will affect only licensee procedures at negligible additional cost.

Since requirements for searches have been in effect for some time, and

!. modifications to those requirements are needed, alternatives to this rulemaking L -

such as revised guidance would be inappropriate in that they would not carry the force of a regulation.

1 The impact on NRC operations will occur in the area of licensing review of amended licensee security plans. Initial cost to the NRC is estimated to be

$46.1K and estimated annual cost in subsequent years is $5.8K.

TIMETABLE

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

~

'NPRM 08/15/84~49 FR 30738 NPRM Coment Period Begin 08/15/84 49 FR 30738 NPRM Coment Period'End 03/07/85 i Final Action 09/85 LEGAL AUTHORITY l 42 USC 2201; 42 USC 584I EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES: No l AGENCY CONTACT:

l l John J. Davidson i Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards Washington, DC 20555 301 427-4708 l

l i

_ _. , ___ _ _ l ~ _ ._._ _._ _ ___ _ _ Z Z 1. . .. .Z.ZlT _ _ . _ , _ _ _

lv ~

E b, -

• ' 1-TITLE: q 530rches of Individuals at Power Reactor Facilities (Part cf Insider Package) y ,

CFR CITATION:

10 CFR 73 ABSTRACT:

Th2 proposed rule would revise the search requirements for individuals entering the protected area of nuclear power plants.

Under the proposed requirements, all persons would he subject to i '

cquipment searches for firearms, explosives and incendiarydavices. 4 Phy v cquipment is not working properly or when the licensee suspects that an individual is attempting to carry into the plant N prohibited devices or material. Random searches were considered

'es an alternative, but were dismissed as being possibly ,

ji disruptive. Since licensees already possess the necessary  !

this rule will affect only licensee procedures at i squipment, nagligible additional cost. - - i. 1 i

l '

Since requirements for searches have been in effect for some -

time, and modifications to those requirements are needed, olternatives to this rulemaking such as revised guidance would be  ;

inappropriate in that they would not carry the force of a J regulation. i C

The estimated average annual cost to each affected licensee is '

$8,000. The impact on NRC operations will occur in the area of licensing review of amended licensee security plans. Initial cost to the NRC is estimated to be $46,100 and estimated annual cost (r[

(.

in subsequent years is $5,800. .

.) '

TIMETABLE:

NPRM 08/01/84 49 FR 30726 NPRM Comment Period Begin 08/01/84 49 FR 30726 ,

Comment period extended 12/11/84 49 FR 48200 :l ,

NPRM Comment Period End 03/07/85 d, Final Action 09/00/85 d i-LEGAL AUTHORITY:

42 USC 2201; 42 USC 5841 No .

EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES:

AGENCY CONTACT: .

Tom R. Allen  !!

Office of Nuclear Material Safety I cnd Safeguards '

I Washington, DC .20555 301 427-4010 g y - 006 Y vol . t, N o./ /

g MD

~c m_________ .

~ ~

~

W.-.

.g,-

g.

Y

"[

0-e- _

r

,A me

- RpLEMAKING AS CURRENTLY PROPOSED I

4

~- -- - ...---- - -. . . _ . ._, _ _ . _ _ , , . _

M e

9 0

l .W Federal Register / VoL es. pso. zes i vvenneeney. augm a. am i mir-u -

enviroessentalimpact statement nor an

h. -susneservasrv seseensavisse On tha==har L 2eso, the Commission environmentalassessment has been T

r ~ ontended the hapiementation den for prepared forthis proposed rule.

I pet.down searches at power reec, tors Paperwork Redesdion Act

'" until revloed eserch procedures could be ,

' ' written in physical protection plans and %e proposed rule has been submitted

^ approved (45 FR 7esto). At the same to the OfBce of Management and Budget use the c-=ta=laa teseed proposed for clearance of theinformation

' soviolons to to CFR 73.55(d)(1) to Saalize eagecdon - " that may be seguirements for personnel searches at . appropdaEmArtePapework protected ama entry portals of power Reduction Act(Pob.Ltr,.511).ne SF-es. Sw Claaman" Seppanng De ted and received Statement. and related doceaantation puhuc comment on to proposed .subedtted to OMB wGlbe placed in the

' 10 CPR Part y2 == mad =aats. r--ts were received NRC Public he Room et1717 H from as suhues,ene Wtry Street NW., Washington, D.C 2D555.ne oowesaBon ergenisadens,one material wul be available for laspection

. Searches ofinsevklusie etPower - manufacturer, one- e Rooster Peculties ,. -

• . government agency,and two private ammeev:NuclearRegulatory citisans.no r-=laalaa,has now Regulatory FlaxibiRty CardScaden P-=laalan. revloed the tale concerning search in accordance with the Regulatory aaveset Propoe,d rule. L ----ts inlight ofthe public Flexibility Act of teso. 5 U.S.C so6(b).

casaments and in respana to the r-=taaion hereby certifies that 2 eumasaav:ne Nuclear Regulatory ra-===adadoes made by tlw Safety /

these proposed regulations wul not, if, r==*==laa le proposing an ===ad==at Safeguards Review Committee.nis promulgated, have a signincant e to its requirements for entry searches at Comunitteehad tin overalltask of acanamic impact on a substantial A power reactor faculties.nis regulation . etudying powerreactor safeguards

=ts for requirementsiand practices to determine amatwr of small entities.Dese 7 le needed to clarify.- _ proposed regulations affect electric

- esarches ofindividuals et these whether actual or potential naanlets

, exist with plant safety objectives, stuities that are damiamat in their

, facilities.nis ===ad==at requires respective service aross and that own

' eqtspoent meerches of an ladividuals l ne e imaiaaisnowproposing and operate nuclear power plants. nese

, seeklog access to protected areas except that all persons entering the protected v en-duty peace ofBoere, and pet-down area of anclear power plants (except on. stilities do not fall within the deBaltion

• searches when detection equipment dutylow enforcement ofBcer:)be of small businesses set forth in Section a -

falls, or cause to suspect exists.nis ., osarched using metaldetectors and of the Small hala=== Act.15 U.S.C 832.

proposed ===ad==at wG1 support the explosive detectors.nis er *ithin'the smallBusiness Size ra-=iami sgoalofincreased . ===ad==at diffare from current Standards set forth in to CFF. Part 121.

assurance that power reactore are laterim procedures in that vgg,would Dese proposed regulations wiu afect be subjectto routine equipment some nuclear powerindustry adequately protected against esbotage by an insider. _

- searches rather than physical " pat- - contractors and vendors all of which are large concerns which service the savua:De an==aat period expires . down" esarches." Pat-down" searches would be required only when the industry.

Friday, December y.iee4.c===ats licensee has cause to suspect that an received after this date willbe individualis attempting to introduce Esgulatwy Analysis ,

considered if it is practical to do so. but contreband (firearms, explosives, or ne net increase initial cost to the assurance of consideration cannot be NRC due to estimated time to be spent Cven except as to aa====ts received '"""dites). or when the detection '

equipment is out of servica.De in reviewing proposed changes to se or before tids.date. exempson fw d w enforament physical protection plans is 346.1K amammeese ca--ts should be sent ofBeers abeen as amatter of j initially and 85.aK per year themafter.

c

• to the Secretary of the -=1ssion. U.S. { Pro knplementation of these revised Nuclear Regulatory Co==laston. e had considered the requirements as proposed herein would Washington.DC 20565. Attention: f undom h for scrwood not apmunt any ineman cats to Docketing and Service. Branch.' ladividaala but the Safety / Safeguards Conuments may also be delivered to Ersunt beensen becauw mquW Review Committee found that moet amarms and explosives detection ,

Room 1121.1717 H Street NW limanees have successfully adjusted to equipment is currently in place at most Washington. DC. between 3:14"a.m. and 100% equipment searches, and lulieve seo pan. Copies of comments received reactor sites.

that changing to random searches would e a the = fon's Pub Yn e search airement amend =matis Hazardous materials-transportation.

DocumentRoom at1717 H Street NW., being upub bwaum ofits Nuclear materials. Nucleer power plants Washington, DC laterreladonship with the proposed and reactors. Penalty. Reporting con pusmesa scenenavioes coerract: Access AuthorisationRule. requirements. Security amasures.

Tosa R. Allen. Chief. Regulatory

• Enviraa==a*=1 Impact: Categorical Activities Section, or Henry S. For the reasons set outin the Blussenthal El. Division of Safeguards. E"8I""** prumble and under the authority of the OfBos of NuclearMaterialSafety and i e ne NRC has determined that this Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended.

proposed rule is tlw type of action the Energy Reorganization Act of1974.

Safeguards. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory as amended, and 5 U.S.C s*3. notice is Comunisolon. Washington.DC 20665. described in cetesorical exclusion 10 hereby given that adoption of the telePhone(sot)427-4010. CFR 51.21(c)(3).nerefore neither an

f'** raines aegiseur / Vol. es, No. See / Wednesday, August 1.1984 / Proposed Rules 30739 4 '

'i 8sEowing emendment b to CFR part 73 enamos eselstance.By (130 days from

go contempiated, the effective date of tids ===ad==at) r .eech Boensee shad submit revisions to CApry 73 -pHYSICA1.pft0TECTIO910F les seaarity plan which denne how the

- ptAstra AssoIAATEftIALS ,

Saalsearch requirements of this paragraph wiube met.N Enalagarch i '

3.m sothedty dtation for part 73 is requirements of this package must be revised to read as leBows: Implemented by the lie ===aa within 80 i Asshedsy: Secus 58,1st, es Stat. Est see, as days after Commission approval of the easeded, see. ser.se stat. Fue(4 UAC proposed securtly plan ruvision.

mrs aner. aseth ses. ast. a stet. sass. es . . . . ,

d' " " ' " ##'

,',",',,"a'g'g", Deted et washimsess. DC, this arth day at Seselse Ft.artf) le also lasund under sec. JelF1sesi -

act, pub.L.gMsE, es Seet. Fee (43 UAC For the Nacient Rasalatory r' .t s Seet sees).

por the perposes of sec. 233. m Stat. See6 as SesseelJ.(2dBi, i emended 42 UAC 3373k ll 7121.F12F(gk Secreenryefes Costadsslos.

i Fass ase loseed under ses.1mb6 m Stat. sea.

as assaded (as UAC East (b]k 18 Fa.at 8'""**"""'*****"I l

F3.24, F5.35, F&at F3JF. Fear, FE4E F3645, M 8888 3W***48 F14e6 F3.8E F1.30. FESF are isoned under sec.

Sett e Stat. Set as amended (43 UAC East #)k and ll F&m(cNik F3.34(bM1k .

l . FEMbM3h (hXek and (kM4k F3JFla) and (bk j- FRJF(fL FE4e(b) and (dk F3.4e(gXs) and (hM2).

~ Fase(sN2k (3XtilMB) and (hk Faas(hX2l and 14XinXBL FEra, Fast. Fas are issued under ess.1me, es Stat. set as amended (42 UAC Esottojk

, 9 7185 (Assendedi

3. Se I 73.85, paragraph (dX1)le -

. revised to read as tallows:

e. . . . .

esM1)h (d) Acosse ?-

kommese shan oc'atrolau pointe of paracanal and vehicle aconesinto a protected arms. Identification and search of aRladividuale unless otherwise provided herein must be made and

~ __ _ _ _

entbortsetica must be checked at these~

pointe. h eserch ihnetion for detection of Brearms, =- '- 6 and sar-aas-y devices abau be accomplished through the use of both Srearms and explosive ,

detection equipment capable of '

detecting tboos devices. The lie =aaae shan subject aR persons anoept bons

• Sde federal, state, and locallaw enforcement personnel om ofBcial duty tz these equipment soarebes epon entry into a protected area. When the licensee has cease to suspect that an ladividual le cttempting to introduce Brearms, explosives, er lacendiary devices into protected areas, the liceam eban conduct a physical pet < lows search of that ladividual.However trearms er explosives detection equipment et a portat ie out of service er not operating satisfactory, the licensee shau conduct a pirysical pet down search of au persons who womid otherwise have besa subje t b equipment searches.De ladividual responsible for the last access control function (contreuing aA=i==ta= to the -

protected areal shen be isoleted within o ballet-resistieg structure se described la persproph (CMS)of this sectice to assure mis er her ability to respond or to

. , , _____,_..,.__--.-.w__.-_.,.m_ _ , - ,_ , _ _ _ - - -,,,m.--,,--._.-_._--

&, .~

[.~

E:

?i i.

x 4

/

W A d BACKGROUND INFORMATION I

i l

l

,I' .. -

j

=

.,,:m j ., - __ -. ..

y

.7 "

P pt .

6 Y,. -

..e '

5 -

1

1. j July 29.1983 " '

.,s L,.-s...  ; SECT-83-311

~: -

. , , . . . C : ~. :M .'. . O ~ 5 .

l e f,o2:

, The Commissioners

';a. .

fede:

.; W1111em Executive Director J. Dircks .for Operations i

y

• i

.?

Sub_fect: PROPOSED D1510ER SAFEGUARDS RULES Puroose:

+ To present for Commission consideration, three related rulemaking

.M actions concerning revised requirements for safeguarding power

- reactors. One of the rulemaking actions, the Access *

, Authorization, Rule, was prepared in response to Commis tion

,c -

direction in a memorandum to the Acting EDO from the- Secretary dated June 30, 1980.

I Ii Ofscussion: This paper covers proposed rules in three areas related to safe-

! guards requirements for power reacto:s. These are:

o Access Authorization Rule (Screening Requirements) o Search Requirements Rule (Pat-1)own Search Issue)

{ - --- - .. - - - .

Vital Area Designation, etc.) .

l .

i

• This rule package was studied by a multi-office Safety / Safeguards i

Committee which was formed in response to the Chairman's requent of August 16, 1982. The Committaa had the overall task of study- -

ing power reactor safeguards requirements and practices to datard eine whether actual or potential conflicts exist with plant safety ob.jectives. The Committee's recommendations have been

, , ac:ommodated in this package.

Contacts:

,' T. R. Allen or -

H. 5. Blumenthal, SGPR -

, 42-74010 K. I. Jangochian or '

W. C. Floyd, RES 44-35976 . e. '"i '; *! i *

.s

• \

l .

I g . s. * * ?.!

I i

t

- - _ . .L -. , . - ~ ~ . -.

\ -

_ - _ - - - '~~ -

j F e, * -

-]

1 The Chemissioners

- 1 2 l p, .

1  ;

i Access Authorization Rule  !

i

- This proposed rule would establish a personnel screening program

-] for licensee employees and contractor personnel. It is designed

2 to provide increased assurance of trustworthiness. Further details are provi.ded in Enclosure A. Key elements of the program are:

} o Background Investigations to look for past behavior that

> would indicate that the individual is unreliable or untrustworthy.

1 ..

o J! A Continual Behavioral Observation Program designed to detect l? changes in an individual's behavior pattern which indicates a ,

j; ; potential for coemitting acts detrimental to the pubite health and safety. (On June 24, 1982, the Commission approved ..

publishing for pubite comment a complementary rule concern- i ing " fitness for duty." That program will also depend on - . .

.. behavioral observation.) - ' '

i i. -

o Support measures such as review procedures, grandfathering, li protection of information, guidance, and treatment of temporary workers'. '

i: .

A Hearing Board established in 1978 to examine the issue et -

h access authorization later recommended that the Commission include i psychological programs. assessment as a component.of personnel screerling In developing this rule,* however, the staff infarmally w- sought the opinions of various _ authorities concerning-the value --

of psychological aiissment for predicting behavior inimical to a the pubite health and safety. Because of the wide variety of j opinions expressed, the staff proposes to solicit further public comment on this issue in the Supplementary Information accompany -

ing the rule rather than proposing specific requirements at this time." .

Search Reavirements Rule This amendment would clarify the role of pat-down searches as a ,

safeguards measure to be used only for suspicion or malfunction of search equipment and would complete outstanding action on industry petitions which have been pending since 1977. Although .

this rule has been previously published as a proposed rule in  :

1980, it appears appropriate to repubitsh it (along with the other related rules) for a second round of public comment in light of the Safety / Safeguards Committee's findings that most "The Office of ' Policy Evaluation advises that the NRC contractor who provided the -

study on the behavioral observation program states a revised program would be ,'

ntcessary 1f psychological assessment is not required. The staff plans to consider -

this position along with public co=ments'when received. -

. I' s i

m._

b

1 v. . ,

., s The Commissioners . . .

i 3 l

3, .

j licensees have successfully adjusted to 100% aquipment searches, and believe that changing to random seatrches would be disruptive.

I Miscellaneous Safecuards-Related Amendments 4

These Kay proposed features are: changes are discussed irr detail in Enclosure C.

s1 f

' . o a A revised concept of vital area designation and protection.'

t This would result in a reduction in the number of areas at most' sites by grouping and protecting selected

/ vital itses of vital equipment in fewer vital areas. Safety 0- would be enhanced through fewer access control points.

(

E 'o ,

Improved provisions for vital equipment access control . .j i

;, ,

, during both routine and emergency conditions. -

,j' i

' o Provision for Ucensees to have the authority to suspend .. '

conditions. measures to facilitate response to emergency safeguards

?. s i ^ o  !'

Revised changes. critaria for determining the need for lock and key i Locks and keys would be changed annually, upon

, suspicion ,of compromise, or wtjen an. individual terminates l'

' employment under unfavorable circumstances. ~

, CRGR Recommendation - - * *

. i'

. r The CRGR~_has recommended publication of the proposed rule; however 7 '

t it believes that public comment should be sought on the use of a ,

government operated clearance program similar to that prescribed j in 10 CFR Part 11 for "Q" clearances as an alternative to the proposed industry-administered screening program. The CRGR

! suggested that government clearances would provide increased .

' l

, assurance of trustworthiness, thereby permitting a reduction in ,

s i

access controls and other security measures.

i .- I The issue af an industry-operated program versus a government- E operated program was previously consioered by a Hearing . Board  ;

! convened at the Commission's airection and in detail by the '

Commission itself. The Hearing Soard recommended a private

! sector program such as proposed in the attachment. The Ccamission recognized that controversy existed concerning its authority under '

, section 161(1)(2) of the Atomic Energy Act to require government clearances for individuals working at power reactors (CLI-80-37), 7 4 12 NRC 528, 336, footnote 18 (1980). While the staff believed that such authority existad, the Office of General Counsel advised j

~

that the better legal view was that section 161(f)(2) could not i be read broadly enough to consider the sabotage of light water

. reactors as c:nstituting a threat to the national security, ,

l t

a

- - - - - ' ~~ I

,v.. . e-9W8 ~" ---------. -

g. ,

. r: . * *

'ya .

[: The Commissioners 4 a

q theretty not permitting the use of a government-administered .

clearance program (OGC legal opinion, September 11,1979). It j: .

any be that the Comeission will wish to' reconsider this issue at a

i s this time, Value/Immact

• I Thisrulemakingpackageisdesignedtoimprovethepracticality

' and effectiveness of measures to protect against the insider threat at power reactor facilities while enhancing plant safety.

' 3 The staff believes that costs associated with these changes can

f he minimized because many reactor licensees are either presently j.j using similar safeguards programs (e.g., personnel background q screening under ANSI 18.17) or can accommodate the proposed ,

a amendments (e.g., re-configuration of the interior layout of

• their plants to protect vital safety equipment under the " vital i

'1 island" approach) without undue expense. ,*

4

.; The enclosures indica'te that costs to the licensee of these amend-ments will be approximately 31.7M per site on an initial basis

' with annual maintenance cost of $300K. It will initially cost l! -

new plants, which receive their operating license after the effec-tive date of this rule, approximately 5603K to screen their i! employees with the same annual maintenance cost as existing

- plants. These expenditures are partially offset by cost savings

associated with licensees establishing a reciprocity program for

. J. personnel screening and reduced key and lock control . requirements. .

• Such reductions are estimated to reduce the cost to each site by approximately 5200K per year. Costs to the NRC are estimated at 1! 5760K in staff time initially with annual maintenance approximat-

'i ing $170K. It is anticipated that no occupational radiation exposure will be associated with faplementation of this proposed

'l .

rule package.

i;

' Interrelationshio

L

~

As previously stated, these proposed rule changes are presented

- together because of their marked interrelationship. Any major changes to the principal components of the proposed access authorization program could impact the proposal to relax require-ments for lock and key controls and other current requirements. . . .

i .

Recommendations

That the Commission:

,'i

1. Aoorove the amendments as set forth in Enclosures A, 8, and

,i C for publication as proposed rules in the Federal Register, with a 90-day public comment period. .

!: t l.

I 1

I t

l .

}

^~. - ' ~ ^ , ___C[ _C((_ __~[_ _ _. , _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _

v' .

e. .

t -

l The Commissioners , 5

,t '

ti ' .

4 2.

y In order to satisfy the requirements of the Regulatory '

Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 605(b), certify that this rule

',: will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial

'] number of small entitles. This certification is included 4 in the enclosed Federal Register notices contained in Enclo-sures A, B, and C. -

..u' -

3.*

Note:

3.i t

' a. That the staff will revise the supplemental information

i of the Access Authorization Rule as necessary and

• appropriate to reflect any of the Commission's instruc-

j tions pertaining to the question of a government run

_4 clearance program for power reactors resulting from

__ the Commission's review of this proposal. .

b. -

' ;, That the value/ impact statements which appear as attach- - .

ments to Enclosures A, 8, and C will be placed in the

,d - NRC Public Document Room.

c. That draft guidance materials for the enclosed rule-9 making actions will be made publicly available concur-j rently with publication of these amendments (Attach-

ment'2 to Enclosures A and C). ~

! i d.

i That, in accordance with 10 CFR 51.5(d)(3), neither environmental impact statements nor negative declara-

!. _. tions need'ba prepared since the proposed amendments are not significant from the standpoint of environ-l .j mental impact.

e.

.i That these amendments contain information collection:

s and reporting requirements that are subject to review .

by the Office of Management and Budget. Upon Commis-sion affirmation, formal request for OM8 review and .

l ' clearance will be initiated. OMB review say take 8 60-90 days from the date of publication in the Federal'

• Register. If appr val is denied by OM8, the Commis-sion will be notified. .

f. That appropriate Congressional Committees will be

• advised of these actions (see drafts provided as attach-

ments to Enclosures A, 8, and C).

I .

! g.

' That pubite announcements will be issued (see drafts provided as attachments to Enclosures A, 8, and C.).

h. That copies of the Federal Register notices will be i

distributed by ADM:TIOC to all affected licensees and l

. other interested persons. "

4 i .

t g _ *

- ~

y,_,. ._,____s

.-*i- w------ - - - - - . m- .. ____._ _ __ , _ _ , _ _ , _ , . - . _ , _ _ _ _ _ , _ , _ _ _ , , _ _ _ _ _ . , , , . _ _ _ _ _ , . , _ . _ , _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _

, , , , _ _ , ._,,,m._,__._

1 . .

3 -, -

'5 .... . .

. The Commissioners 6 Y

.?

q ., -

.. 1. That the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small

, , Susiness Administration will be informed of the certification and the reasons for it as required by

the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

s y Scheduline:

The. staff requests scheduling at an early policy session.

't

'Y Y

1, -

17avJ.Di i

Executive Director for Operations 5

Enclosures:

1 1 A - Access Authorization Rule '

' .1 5 - Search Requirements Rule '

,- , C - -Miscellaneous

- Related Amendments

!1 ' ,

ll Commaissioners' comments or consent should be provided directly

!I to the Office of the secretary by c.c.b. Friday, Auoust 26, 1983.

ii

!! comunission staff office comments, if any, should be submitted to the Commissioners NLT Friday, August 19, 1983, with an infor- .

nation copy to the office of the secrecary. If the paper is of such aand review naturecomment, that it requires additional time for analytical-t be apprised of when conuients may.be expected._the Causaissioners and the - - - - - - -

I Y . DISTRIBUTION:

Consaissioners

• lj CGC .

OPE -

~

- OCA 3

OIA -

. j OPA f f

REGIONAL OFFICES EDO ELD '

ACES yy -

ASLAP '

SECT 9

I -

e .

.I i .

i

-- . c - .-- - - - -- 1,e

,,a-e.. * - " ' "

,-----v-. w-*ww.--- mm. --- . . - - - - --- . . - - _ - , _--,..._-y-%.m4. -- - - -

--..,,,---.--.,-.m-. . - ,--,,,,. win,,-y -m------w --sc9-#------+---e,wp--eu.y-m

'Dr

• ,

• g g

. b * % e9

• • e

- 9 f .

s t, - .

g. . .

d s .

e e

9 8

I C

e t

4 e

O e

S 9 I

J

'l e

e

• O e e 8 e

• V J

• e I

ENCLOSURE 8

• ~ '

satCH REQUIRENENTS RULE e

e 1

6 i

. . . _ - = - = . - - . . _

• O e

e 0

0 e

9 4

e

'* H M *

• 9

• e H oo go w . e ,

W I

..- . _ -~.

3 >. . .

.i .

t

.] . *

. ,4 ., ,

RESOLUTION OF THE PAT-00WN SEARCH ISSUE

.\

-} Sectoround and scooe of Proaren

'i 3 The Commission was petitioned in 1977 to suspend a requirement for the use

)

l of pat-down searches as a matter of routine. Interia search requirements were T

established and action was deferred on the petition pending the development of a risle specifying entry search requirements. A proposed rule on this subject j was issued for pubite comment in 1380. The staff has now revised the rule

• 7 concerning search requirements in light of the pubite comments and in response to recommendations ande by the Safety / Safeguards Review Committee (see Attach-T.

i ment 1). This Committee, which was formed in response to the Chairman's request

j of August 16, 1982, had the overall task of studying power reactor safeguards

4 requirements and practices to detemine whether actual or potential conflicts

]  !

exist with plant safety objectives.

The Safety / Safeguards Review Committee recoemended that all persons entering

.ij the protected area of nuclear power plants be searched using estal detectors

'j and explosive detector 3

• This recommendation, which the staff generally endorses,

) differs from the current interis 7rocedures in that visitors would be subject to routine equipment searches rather than physical ." pat-down" searches. . ." Pat -

l~j~ down" ' searches would be required only when the licensee has cause to suspect tgat an individual is attempting to introduce contraband (firearms, explosives,

] or incendiaries), or when the detection equipment is out-of-servica. The staff-3 'I 1 . has added an exemption free searches for on-auty law enforcement officers as a ,

l .] setter of practicality. _

The staff has considered the use of randos searches for screened individuals, but the Safety / Safeguards Review Committee found that most ifcansees have successfully adjusted to 100Y, equipment searches, and believed that changing .

to random searches would be disruptive.

f One to its interrelationship with other provisions of the Insider Safeguards I. Rule Package, these revised search requirements are again being published in proposed form.

06/16/83 1 Enclosure B l.

l l

, _ _ , -**r--

me 4hed.h *N"'-* '*

W *

f . .

L.

t, =

J._ , . ,

e i

1 .

i t .

i.

j ATTAQ WENT 1 TO THE i

PAT-DOWN SEARCH ENCLOSURE (ENCL. 8)

FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICE 4

l e m e +- -ee e4p. maw - em --

s

) .

e

• e i

e 4

e e

l'A p=mw -

M', --S, -- ,_

9" W ~m +r , .o-.wo,ow w-

+. ,

j t-

• t [7590-01] -

4 i .

7.,

1

< NUC1. EAR REGULATORY C0l#9155 ION 10 CFR Part 73 Searches of Individuals at Power Reactor Facilities >

l I

i AGENCY: Muclear Regulatory Commission.

. .I

ACTION

Proposed rule.

Sta n utY

The Nuclear Kagulatory Commission is proposing an amendment to

) its requirements for entry searches at power reactor facilities. This j regulation is needed to clarify requirements for searches of individuals '

at these facilities. This amendment requires equipment searches of all j

. individuals seeking access to protected areas except on-duty peace officers, and pat-down searches when detection equipment fails, or cause to suspect exista. This proposed amendment will support the Commssion's

. goal of increased assurance that power meters tre adequately protected

against sabotage by an insider.

~~~~~*

. DATES: The comment period expires . Comments

! received aftain. will be considered if it is practical to do so, but assurance of consideration cannot be given except as to

• comments received on or before this data. '

?u 3

ADDRESSES: Comments should be sent to the Secretary of the Commission, ll I

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555, Attention:

Docketing and Service Branch. Comments asy also be delivered to Room 1121, .

1717 H Street W., Washington, OC, between 8:15 a.m. and 5:00 p.m.

Copies of comments received are available for examining and copying for a fee at the Commission's Public Document Room at in7 H Street W. .

Washington, OC. ~

I

. 06/21/83 1 Attachment 1 to Enclosure B

_ _n _.

. -r - _. . . - - - . . . - - - ~~ -- --

-'-1

_ _ _ . . . . - _ . . . . ~ - _ _ -- '

._,___.~' "~~~_

r ..

j ; . .

2 m.:

9 i

]' FOR PURTHER DIFORMATION CONTACT: Tom R. Allen, Chief. Regulatory Activ-1 ittes section, Division of safegua-es. Office of Nuclear Material Safety

'j and Cafeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555, 4

telephone (301-427-4010).

1

5'

,3 SUPPLEMMTARY Dr0944 TION: Oa December 1, 1980, the Commission extended j the implementation data for pat-down searches at power reactors until

,j revised search precedures could be written in physical protection plans and approved (45 FR 79410). At the same time, the Commission issued pro-

,j posed revisions to 10 CFR 73.55(d)(1) to finalize requirements for i

personnel searches at protected area entry portals of power reactors, j (45 FR 79492).

,q" -

The Commission invited and received public comment on tha proposed

)j amendments. ,

Comments were received from 25 utilities, three industry h!, - coordination organizations, one equipment manufacturer, one government j agency, and two private citizens. The Commission has now revised the y rule concerning search requirements in Ifght of the public comments and in response to recommendations made by the Safety / Safeguards Review .

1 Committee. This Committee had the overall task of studying power reac-

[ ter safeguards requirements anf practices to determine whether actual or k potential conflicts exist with plant safety objectives.

~

{ The Commissioii isWproposing that all persons entering the -

} .

protacted area of nuclear power plants (except on-duty law enforcemitnt officers) be searched using metal detectors and explosive detectors.

,j This proposed amendment differs from the current interim procedures in -

a

.l that visitors would be subject to routine equipment searches rather than 3 physical " pat-down" searches. " Pat-down" searches would be required only, j when the Itcensee has cause to suspect that an individual is attempting to introduce contraband (firearns, explosives, or f.=.cendiaries), or when

'i the detection equipment is out of service. The exemption for on-duty law l enforcament officers has been added as a matter of practicality.

'1 The Casurission had considered the use of random searches for screened

) individuals, but the Safety / Safeguards Review Committee found that most I

licensees have successfully adjusted to 100lE equipment searches, and

) believe that changing to random searches would be disruptive.

i.

~

06/21/83 2 Attachment I to Enclosure B i

?

k

?

~

^

[7590-01] ,

X 1

The search requirunent amendment is being republished because of its

) ~' interrelationship with the proposed Access AuthoH zation Rule.

2'.

3

PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT

'E 3

The proposed rule has been submitted to the Office of Management and

{

j Budget for clearance of the information collection requirements that any be appropdata under the Paperwork Reduction Act (Pub. L 96-511). The

} SF-83, " Request for Clearance," Supporting Statament, and related docte

'" mentation submitted to We will be placed in the NRC Public Doctment

-t

~

Room at 1717 M Street W., Washington, DC 20555. The mataM al will be

} available for inspection or copying. .

REGULATORY FLEXIBILITY CERTIFICATION '

!i

< $4 In accordance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C.

605(b), the Commission hereby certifies that these proposed regulations l! will not, if promulgated, have a significant economic fepact on a substantial number of small entities. These proposed regulations affect i!

4 electric utilities that are dominant in their respective service areas and that own and operata nuclear power plants. These utilities do not_

.h ~ _ _ , . _ .

-fall within the definition ~ofsmall businesses' s'a' t fodUn Section 3 of the Small Business Act, 15 U.S.C. 632, or within the Small 8usiness Size i

Standards set forth in 10 CFR Part 121. These proposed regulations will-affect some nuclear power in#atr/ contractors and vendors all of which -

l :

are large concerns which service the industry. -

!1

} LIST OF SU8JECTS IN 10 CFR PAkT 73

• Hazardous estarials-transportation, Nuclear materials, Nuclear power plants and reactors, Penalty, Reporting requirements, SecuMty. osasures.

• For the reasons set out in the preamble and under the authority of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, the Energy Reorganization Act

!3 of 1974, as aseeded, and 5 U.S.C. 553, notice is htreby given that adop-ll tion of the following amendment to 10 CFR Part 73 is contemplated.

l

!', 06/21/83 0

i 3 Attrdiment 1 to Enclosure S 1- 1 i

- . .e -

r-

-~m "!{

,.,,_---r _

, v. -, -- , - - -

~ .~_,_..,,,- ~. ~ , - - - ~ ~

,- ~___~___

'g. .

'w T;r. . .

s.. . .

D 3 e.' -

n m

59 ' ' 'PART 73 - PHYSICAL PROTECTION OF PLANTS AM MATERIALS

1

1. The authority citation for Part 73 is revised to read as

.ij , follows

AUTERITY: Sees. 53, 161, 68 Stat. 930, 948, as amended, sec. 147,

! }],j 94 Stat. 780 (42 U.S.C. 2073, 2167, 2201); sec. 201, 88 Stat.1242, as

.?i amended, sec. 204, 88 Stat. 1245 (42 U.S.C. 5841, 5844).

N i Section 73.37(f) is also issued under sec. 301, Pub. L 96-295,

.9 94 Stat. 789 (42 U.S.C. 5841 nota). -

! ,. I For the purposes of sec. 223, 68 Stat. 958, as amended (42 U.S.C.

'(j .

2273); IS 73.21, 73.37(g), 73:55 are issued under sec.161b, 68 Stat. 948,

] -

as amended (42 U.S.C. 2201(b)); SS 73.20, 73.24, 73.25, 73.26, 73.27,

.ni 73.37, 73.40, 73.45, 73.44, 73.50, 73.55, 73.67 are issued under sec.

a 1611, 68 Stat. 949, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2201(f)); and SS 73.20(c)(1), *

! -]1 _

73.24(b)(1), 73.26(b)(3), (h)(6), and (k)(4), 73.27(a) and (b), 73.37(f),

1 73.40(b) and (d), 73.46(g)(6) and (h)(2), 73.50(g)(2), (3)(111)(8) and (h), 73.55(h)(2)..and (4)(111)(8), 73.70, 73.71, 73.72 are issued under

' l' sec. 161o, 68 Stat. 950, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2201(o)).

2. In 5 73.55, para' graph (d)(1) is revised to read as follows:

,. a m . m a i

a (d) Access Requirements. (1) The Ifeensee shall control all .

-a I points of personnel and vehicle access into a protected area. Identi-

.1 fication and search of all individuals unless othe mise Orovided herein-sust be made and authorization must be checked at these points. The search-

[ iJ I j function for detection of firearms, explosives, and incendiary devices *

] [steil L e .4.. 4 eft;... ,, e ;.,.ica+-search-or-by use-of equipment capebie-of-detecti.y e

. J..:....]* shall be accosolished throuch the q use of both firearms and explosive detection eouineent capable of detect-ino those devices.

"* - The licensee shall subiect all corsons exceot bona.

fide federal, state, and local law enforcement oorsonnel on official dutv .

Y-d.

to these ecuionent searches upon entry into a erotected area. When the

.k

! .. = .

4 Camparative text shows changes between present and the newly proposed I

rule. Underlined text shows additions and dashed through text shows' deletions. -

j 06/21/83 4 Attachment 1 to Enclosure B

\

l

-1, l i

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

m -4~m

. _ _ . ~ = = - - -

e -

d [7590-01] .

i.-

,t

>.- ' licensee has cause to s! N that an individual is attemptino to intro-l.

duce fireares. explosives, or incendiary devices into protected areas.

i, the licensee shall cow-t a ohysical nat-down search of that individual.

idhenever fireares or exolosives detection ecuipment at a nortal is out a

.i of service or not ooerstino satisfactorily. the Ifeensee shall conduct a '

[

i

...nical nat-down search of all corsons who would othenvise have been subiect to eouionent searches. The individual responsible for the last access control function (controlling admission to the protected area) shall be isolated within a bullet-resisting structure as described in ~

-i paragraph (c)(6) of this section to assure his or her ability to respond j ,

er to summon assistance. By (120 days from the effective date of this 4 amendment) each licensee shall submit revisions to its security plan j

which define how the final search requirements of this paracraoh will

• t be set. ,

The final search reevirements of this osckace sust be fr. ole-

!f mented by the licensee within 60 days after Commission accroval of the i proposed security plan revisions.

n a a a a 1

l

' Dated at idashington, DC, this day of '

1983.

,e ~

_ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ For the Nuclear _Jtegulatory Commission.- - - - -

t i

Samuel J. Chilk, ~

Secretary of the Commission. .

.t I.

l B

I t

.j -

06/21/83 5 #

Attachment 1 to Enclosure B i

, .- 3= _

. . . . . - _ . , - - . , . - _ , _ . . . ~ - . - ,.a . w . , . _ . . - , . - . . , - - - . _ _ _ . - . _ . . - - . , . . - . . - -

f .

1 9

f 4

.i J

-l .

t i

1 i

.1 4

,- ATTACMENT 2 TO THE j

, PAT-DOW SEARCH ENCLOSURE (ENCL. 8)

'1-VALUE/ IMPACT STATEMENT

.i 4 -

g .

lI. __

il

• I' 4

t e i I

l e

- _ ~ _ __

w. .

qr .. .

i e I;

g VALUE/Il#ACT STATBENT y,.

NUCLEAR POWER REACTOR SEARCH PROCEDURES RULE

'E 2 L THE PROPOSED ACTION 1.1 Descriotion I

l 8

The Commission is amending 10 CFR 73.55(d)(1) to clarify requiregents t for searches of individuals at power reactor protected arsa entry portals.

L2 Value/ Impact of Proposed Action

' a.

'.j L 2.1 value - NRC ~

i This proposed amendment will support the Commission's goal of increased j

assurance that power reactors are adequately protected against sabotage by an f

insider. This amardment represents a safeguards measure designed to provide a .

3 -

measure of deterrence (as well as outright detection) against those persons who

'f might otherwise attempt an act of sabotage by the introduction of firearms,

,f explosives, or incendiary devices. Each licensee is required by the rule, if I

adopted, to submit an amended security plan, which states how the search .

requirement will be met, within 45 days of the amendment's effective data. The security plan serves as a medium whereby licensees commit to specific perform- .

f ance.

The information.provided wi1Lae treated as safeguards -information and f

. used by the NRC licensing staff during their security plan evaluation process.

lj L 2.2 Impact o.

1 j L2.2.1 - E. The ispect on NRC operations will occur in the area of

{ licensing review of the Ifconsee's security plan.

1 Initial cost to the NRC is estimated to be:

Licensing Review and Approvat Security Plan (assuming i 2 staff-days / security plan x 48" plans x $480/ staff-day)

Cost Per Plan Review. . . . . 3 LOK .

Total Initial Review Costs. . 546.1K

} "All currently licensed power reactors are located at 48 sites.

, 06/16/83 1 Attachment 2 to Enclosure B

.,m,-,------.,-.- , , . ..

. ! _ L .-- - --

I,,_.-__

~~~

7;

' ~

,y '. .'

__ _ ~ . = = =

~ -

21 . .

Nl

, J)

- The eatiastad annual cost to the NRC in subsequent years: *

!) -

l

• q Licensing Review and Approval of Security Plans

,;[' (assuming six new plans are licensed each year)

-! (2 staff-days / plan x 6 plans x $480/ staff-day)

'l Unit Cost Per Plan Review . . 5 LOK

.jy Total Annual Review Costs . . 35.8K 1 *,,

1

, L 2.2.2 Industry Goerotions. The required fireams and explosives

• i detection equipment is currently in place at most reactor sites. Therefore, the sost expensive item in the initial cost has already been absorbed by the

,h nuclear industry. However, for sitas that do not have the equipment

/}

,. (app mximately two facilities are without equipment) and those that are

,.} scheduled for future licensing, the following estimates apply: .

g; , Cost estiastas were derived by a randos polling of seven reactor

'. : facilities.

j Itas Price Rance Firearms / Metal Detee. tar. . . *L6K - 35.1K -

] .

Explosives Detector. . . . . $5.0K - $2 LOK .

An arithmetic average of equipment prices was computed for planning purposes.

-8ecause equipment manufacturers are numerous, significant price variations were I

evident.

.i Itas Averace Cost e.

3 Metal Detector. . . . . . . . . . 5 3.4K -

Explosives Detector . . . . . . . $13.0K -

]-

)

~.

l These costs are representative of those that a licensee may expect to i pay for such equipment. The variation in costs per facility will be based ,

upon site-specific differences such as the number of portals in use. at the

! .i., sita.

.I

~

06/16/83 2 Attachment 2 to Enclosure S t

i __ __ . . . --

eeme em-m.=--mm. .a=.A ~ ,,4- -y5

-w ,

y. .

• • a p.

8".

,n.,

=

. te s

- J

.t

s

-t i

- it.

) *

,~

s 7

• t I

. ATTACMENT 3 TO THE PAT-DOWN SEARCH ENCLOSURE (ENCL. B) .

1 DRAFT PUBLIC ANNOUNCDfENT O

,. . _ _ .~ . . . ,- - . ~ ~ - -- ~' ~ ~ ~ ' ' ' ' '

e e

t +

r

• t 1

o g* O i j - *

?.

O O

O a

e 4

e e

. ~ -

.T

. _ , _ _ , . _ . . _ . . . _ _ . ~ . - + . - ~ . - - --- - - - - - - ~ - - ' - ' ~ ~ * - ~

. _ ~ - ,-_ , . - - -

9 -e ,

n . .

D- , ,

91 al .

l e;

• 1

... (DRAFT PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENT) j i NRC PROPOSES TO ABENO REGULATIONS ON SEARCH REQUIREMENTS F

NUCLEAR POWER REACTOR FACILITIES

.i The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is proposing to amend its regulations to clarify requirements governing searches of individuals seeking entry to 3 protected areas at nuclear power reactor facilities.

j " Protected areas" are areas that have controlled access and are enclosed by physical barriers such as fences or walls.

The newly proposed rule will require utilities that are licensed to operata these facilities to use explosive and firears detection equipment to search

,} for contraband. Equipment searches will be required for all individuals. '

j The newly proposed rule differs from the current interim procedures in that vist-ja tors would be subject to routine equipment searches rather than physical " pat-down" searches.

t When detection equipment is not in place or is inoperable, all individuals will i be subject to physical " pat-down" searches. In addition; any person suspected .

l of carrying contraband will he subject to the ." pat-down" search. --

--i - - - - - - - - -- -

Interested persons are invited to submit writtan comments on the proposed '

}

4 amendment to Part 73 of the Commission's regulations to the Secretary, U.S.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555, Attention: Docketing ~

and Servicas Branch, by (90 days after FR publication).

9 1

e O

l l

Ii I

06/16/83 1 Attac!went 3 to Enclosure B 1

4 i

~ ~

i

, - - - .- . , . , _ - - - , , N Y---..,. - , - ,-,-.--,.--, ,- - v - - - - - - - , - - - - - - _ _ - - - . . . - - - _ _ _ _ - - - - - - -

r p

w w ..

. ~,

C't.

i Y

J e.

i i

+

i g>-

s-1 .

C's 3

,7 .

ATTAQ9 TENT 4 TO THE

[' PAT-DOWN SEARCH ENCLOSURE (ENCL. 8)

', . OM COMESSIONAL LETTER 9

9 I

l e

f.

4

, * . , '  %'$ g -- '43 3 I 'I - e 1ST

• 4 g y ,p meeg _

^ ~-

a . .

1 4,

't (ORAFT CONGRESSIONAL LETTER) e 1

Dear Mr. Chaiman:

i i

j Enclosed for the information of the (subcommittee) are copies of a newly

'i proposed amanhent to 10 CFR Part 73 which is to- be published in the Federal l Reo4 ster.

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is proposing to amend its regulations

.,f to clarify requirements for searches of individuals at the entry portals of .

power reactor facilities. These search requirements are intended to provide 4

, protection against radiological sabotage. The Commission previously invited .

j and received public comment on an earlier proposed amendment on this topic. .

]' After reviewing the comments and discussing the issue with ifcensees, the Commission has decided to republish the newly proposed requirements for public l comment. The republication is being done because of the interrelationship

.', h tueen revised search requirements and a proposed personnel screening program. *

'i The revised search requirements have been designed to maintain the type of j personnel searcti program presently practiced by most ifcensees. Under this f _ ameneent, licensees will mse explosives and fiream detection equipment to ~~

search for contraband under routine circumstances. Physical " pat-down" searches i would only be used when equipment fails or when the ifcensee has cause to '

suspect that contraband is being introduced into its facility.

i .

^ .

1 Licensees will be required to submit changes to their security plans reflecting

, the new search requirements within 45 days following the effective date.

, Licensees will implement the revised search procedures within 60 days after Commission approval of plan changes.

Sincerely. -

John G. Davis, Director .

Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards

Enclosure:

Federal Register Notice .

06/16/83 1 Attachment 4 to Enclosure 8 w -

, e -- r-_ _

_ _ _ ~ ' . _ _ _

>; a f ,

1 ..

t .

t

.e s

.1 2

4 i

, =

k i

1 e

B 3

I i . ATTAQ WENT 5 TO THE ,

1 PAT-00W SEAROf ENCLOSURE (ENCL. 8)

SUPPORTING STATEMENT FOR RECORDKEEPING -

j M REPORTING REQUIREMENTS s

10 CFR J3.55(d)(1)- - - - - - - --

.f e

t e e

9 1

i * -

e 8

w. T , 7 ,p -

a ,i%--- --- . i v

- N,%.,N WWFN vg G . gummy

• 7. _ , - , , ,

_ . , _ . - _.. . . _ . - . - ,.m,. _ _ , - m __- , - _ . . , . . . - . _ _ . . , - . . _ _ . . __ .. ,

~

g. .

y,.e I

e$ < .

'; suPPORUM STATEMENT POR RECORDKEEPING AND REPORUM RE@IR j 10 CFR 73.55(d)(1)

A j 1. Justification 1

(1) The Commission was petitioned in 1977 to suspend a requirement for j the use of pat-tiown searches as a matter of routine. Interim search requirements were established and action was deferred on the petition

)

j pending the development of a rule specifying entry search require-monts.

A proposed rule on this subject was issued for public comment

, :i in 1980.

3 The staff has now revised the rule concerning search require-monts.in light of the comments and in response to recommendations made j

by the Safety / Safeguards Review Committee. This Committee, which was j

i8 formed in response to the Chairman's request of August 16, 1982, had the overall task of studying power reactor safeguards requirements and practices to determine whether actual or potential conflicts exist

! with plant safety objectives.

t?

i .!

The Safety / Safeguards Review Committee recommended that all persons l .

entering the protected area of nuclear power plants should be searched j _ _. _.._.--

using esta1 4etectors and explosive detectors. Thir r~ec~mmeridatian, '

o

,i which the staff endorses, differs from the current interim procedures in that visitors would be subject to routine equipment searches rather

} than physical " pat-down" searches. " Pat-down" searches would be required only when the licensee has cause to suspect that an indi- '

vidual is attempting to introduca contraband (firearmir, explosives,

.j or incendiaries), or when the detection equipment is out of service.

.l The staff has considered the use of random searches for screened indi-l4 viduals, but the Safety / Safeguards Review Committee found ,that most I licensees have successfully adjusted to 100% equipment searches, and i believed that changing to random searches would be disruptive. Due to its intarrelationship with other provisions of the Insider Safe-3 guards Rule package, these revised search requirements are again being published in proposed form.

03/29/83 1 Attachment 5 to Enclosure 8

i l-i __

--,? -- - ---- __ _ . - - ,,__ _- ---m n.- ...m , ,e ,.e,,-- ,.,.,,,,,n. -

N ..

Ef L

..g , (ii)

Regulatory Guide 5.7 provides guidance to the licensee for conduct-Q ing personnel searches.

This guide is available to licensees for i ?] use in developing their respective plans.

, d,

'h The licensee fit required to prepare and submit a revised security j

'4 plan to the Commission for review and approval. This plan will

. .t l ,4 delineata how the licensee intends to implement the various search

. requirements.

A review and approval of the plan by the Casumission is needed to assure that these search requirements have been meet  ?

l .

and will be properly carried out.

2)s '

XJ (iii)

Thers are no similar data available in the field which can be used h for these purposes.

) , ,

f 2. Descriotion of Survey Plan

!2}

There are presently 48 nuclear power reactor sites which will be subject

!l to this rule. It is assumed that the program will be organized and admin-l ,].i -

'; istand on a site rather than a reactor unit basis. The sailing address for i.hese affected sitas may be obtained from the of rector of Safeguards, L

i , .

'} Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

~ ~

Commission,~ Washington, DC 20555.

9

3. Tabulation and Pubitcation Plans Revised security plans submitted to the Commission will be reviewed, approved, and filed by the Commission. Specific ifcensee revised security.

plans will not be published for public review or comment in accordance with 10 CFR 2.790(d). The NRC anticipates full compliance with the

regulations.

.t i

03/29/83 2 t

Attacament 5 to Encicsure S  !

1 I

T.

y .

el

'4 l' 4. ,

Time Schedule for Data Collection and Publication A

The licensee will be required to submit to the Commission his Access Authorization Plan for approval within 120 days of the effective date of j the rule. Within 360 days after the rule becomes effective or 120 days after approval by the Commission, whichever is later, the licensee is l required to implement the requirements of his approved plan.

I It is estiseted that it will take about two Commission staff-days to review and approve each plan submitted, and that initially all plans  ;

q

<; will be reviewed and approved within 360 days after receipt of the plans.

i j 5. Consultations outside the Aoenev i .

d - ,-

j The Safety / Safeguards Review Committee, during their task of studying

.i t power reactor safeguards requirements and practices in order to determine -

j '

whether actual or potential conflicts existed with plant safety objec-

3 tives, visited several Ifcensee sites and informally discussed search t

requirements.

1i* The Committee found that most ifcensees have successfully '

adjusted to 1005 equipment searches, and believed that changing to randos ~

i. searches would be disruptive.

__ __The suggestions and recommendations of'-the - --

r ~ ~' '

Casunittee's findings have been taken into consideration in the proposed

, revision of the rule.

i 6. Estimation of Resoondent Recortino Burden ~

L i Mueber of a

Respondents i Regulatory Annual After Effective Annual Reports Total Time staff Section Date of Rule Filed /Resoondents Recuired/Resoonse Hours

1. 10 CFR 73.55(d)(1) 48 initially 1 plan / licensee 16 san-hours / plan 768 i.

i i

l 03/29/83 3 Attachment 5 to Enclosure B

W '__

l

\

p . .

+ .  :

+', ,

m .-

2

+

• i'~..

, 7.

Estimate of Cost to Federal Governments 4

~, '

..,i

' ' It is estimated that it will cost the NRC 546.lK (2 staff-days / plan x v.e; .-

" 48 plans x 5480/ staff eys) to review and appmve all submitted security e

plans.

4 i

.] ~ It is estimated that six new plants will submit plans for review and t

1. I .

approval each year which will cost the NRC about $3.8K to process

'i (2 staff-days / plan x 6 plans x $480/ staff-day).

il 1 y:4 z

s:

?) -

, -g :

?4

~:

5 3

i 1 . '.

1 s

l

'.$ t l ; .

4

.S i

4

.i 4

03/29/83 4 Attachment 5 to Enclosure 8 i

W. &

7 i

q<.

+

4 W

NO O RES TASK LEADER EVALUATION AND RECOM ENDATION 1

i 1

I

?:

[

RES STAFF REVIEW

SUMMARY

SHEET

1. Review of the completeness of the Rulemaking Review Package:

a. The NRC Regulatory Agenda entry has been updated to reflect the most current status of the rule. i

b. The rulemaking package as it was published in the Federal Register as a proposed rule (49 FR 30726, 8/1/84) is complete.

c. The sponsoring office Director's recomendation to the EDO concerning continuation with the proposed rulemaking is included.

d.- The results of the sponsoring office review (Evaluation for Rulemaking) was not included in this package.

~~

e. A copy of the Commission paper and regulatory analysis (value/ impact statement) were complete and included in the analysis. Not included was the CRGR package. However, since the rule has already been published in proposed form, the CRGR had previously reviewed the package and their recomendations were addressed in the Comission paper.

f. No sumary sheets, forms, or other documentation were requested by OEDO or "others" to assist in their review of the rulemaking.

Therefore, no such items were included in the review package.

l 2. Results of Review by the RES Task Leader:

a. The proposed rule package addresses the problems to be clarified.

However, more background information could be added in order to provide a stronger justification for the rulemaking. -

b. The necessity and urgency of the proposed rulemaking are reasonable as presented in the package. The proposed rule is needed to clarify the requirements for searches of individuals at nuclear power plants by eliminating " pat-down" search requirements for visitors to protected areas, and to avoid potential delay of necessary law enforcement personnel. The proposed rule is an integral part of the Insider Rule Package which was published for public coment on August 1,1984.

l

c. The alternative to rulemaking stated in the rule package l appears to be reasonable.

d. The issues addressed through the rulemaking, which are: (1)

Elimination of " pat-down" searches of visitors to protected areas;(2) A requirement for equipment searches of all individuals seeking access to protected areas, except on-duty peace officers; and (3) Pat-down searches when detection equipment fails, or cause to suspect exists, are sound.

w

?-

2

e. The value/ impact analysis contained in the proposed rule package adequately addressed the impact to the public, industry, and NRC, including benefits and costs,

f. The NRC resources and scheduling needed for this proposed rulemaking were analyzed and judged to be reasonable.

3. General Comments and Recommendations:

a. The subject actions are intended to clarify requirements for searches of individuals at power reactor facilities. This

- proposed amendment will support the Commission's goal of

- increased assurance that power reactors are adequately protected against sabotage by an insider.

c.

b. It is recommended that this proposed rulemaking should proceed.

3; ,,

The staff is currently reviewing public comments, and any

- modifications to this rule would be a result of incorporating jg- needed changes.

' 4, -

I

. . _ . . _ . -