ML20216B287
| ML20216B287 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Monticello  |
| Issue date: | 04/03/1998 |
| From: | NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20216B280 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-263-98-05, 50-263-98-5, NUDOCS 9804130413 | |
| Download: ML20216B287 (2) | |
See also: IR 05000263/1998005
Text
,
.O
1
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGIONlli
Docket No:
50-263
License No:
Report No:
50-263/98005(DRS)
Licensee:
Northern States Power Company
Facility:
Monticello Nuclear Generating Station
Location:
414 Nicollet Mall
Minneapolis, MN 55401
Dates:
March 9-13,1998
Inspector:
G. Pirtle, Physical Security inspector
Approved by:
James R. Creed, Chief, Plant Support Branch 1
Division of Reactor Safety
Enclosure
5
TM
ico Thia /
Deccatm11e4
9804130413 980403
{DR
ADOCK 05000263
1
)
,
/'
l
l
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant
NRC lnspection P,eport 50-263/98005
This inspection included a review of the physical security program. It was an announced
inspection conducted by a regional physical security specialist.
A violation was noted pertaining to failure to adequately protect safeguards
information on three occasions between October 9,1997 and February 17,1998.
The procedures for compensatory measures for extended security computer
outages will be upgraded. Protected area access control measures were
effective (Section S1).
,
The reliability of an important security system component has not improved since
'
-
the previous inspection. Other security equipment observed functioned as
designed and compensatory measures for equipment failure were seldom
required. Maintenance support for security equipment appeared timely and
l
effective (Section S2) .
,
I
Records reviewed were complete and accurate. Procedural guidance was for
=
recovery actions after loss of some specific dual security systems was
!
weak and upgraded during the inspection. A category of material exempted from
l
,
search upon entry into the protected area was questionable (Section S3).
I
l
Security force performance has been consistent within the past year. Security
-
force members were knowledgeable of post requirements. Security supervisors
1
I
were active in providing good oversight of ongoing security activities. Plant
personnel demonstrcted a high level of awareness and compliance with secunty
requirements during entry into the protected area (Section S4).
l
l
Training records reviewed were complete and accurate (Section SS).
The self-assessment program within the security section was extensive, well
-
monitored, and effective (Section S7).
I
2
Diolosure C
Upon
Thi
r
lied