ML20245J749
| ML20245J749 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Maine Yankee |
| Issue date: | 04/24/1989 |
| From: | Della Ratta A, Keimig R, Lancaster W NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20245J712 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-309-89-07, 50-309-89-7, NUDOCS 8905040238 | |
| Download: ML20245J749 (7) | |
See also: IR 05000309/1989007
Text
- - - -
r/Ir:sa M:- h.,_
.
hirrt/G- ,. -.--
,
'
.
Ar:g:4
4&N
m(c.a ..m;%c4E '
u~3
p.9
-
,.
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION I
Report No. 50-309/U9-07
Docket No. 50-309
License No. DPR-35
Licensee: Maine Yankee Atomic Power Company
83 Edison Drive
Augusta,- Maine 0433E
Facility Name: Maine Yankee Atomic Power Station
Inspection Conducted: March 20-24, 1989
Type of Inspection: Routine, Unannounced Physical Security
Date of Last' Physical Security Inspection: Novemt er 14-18, 1988
-Inspectors:
bJ. k
m
U M-64
W. K. Lancaster, Physical Security Inspector-
date
. . .
-
.,
a
. A. Della Ratta, Safeguards '.Witor
date
-
Approved by:
.
p
MN-[9
jCR. R. Keimig, Chie
afeguards Section
date
Division of Radi
on Safety and Safeguards
Inspection Summary: Routine, Unannounced Physical Security Inspection on
March 20-24,1989 (Report No. 50-309/89-07)
Areas Inspected: Onsite follow-up of previously identified violations;
Management Support, Security Program Plans and Audef,
-otected Area Physical
Barriers, Detection and Assessment Aids; and Protetled .rea Access Control of
Personnel, Packages and Vehicles.
Results: The licensee was found in noncompliance with the NRC-approved
Physical Security Plan in the area of Access Control-Vehicles.
l
8905040238 890425
{DR
ADOCK 05000309
j
1
_ - - - - -
_ - - - - - _ - - - - - - _ - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - --
--
- - - - - -
-
_
,
. _ _ . _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _
_ _ _ _ _ __
- .=
e'
,
,
.
DETAILS
I.
Key Persons Contacted
a.
Licensee and Contractor Personnel
- P. Lydon, Vice President, finance and Administration-
- E. Boulette, Vice President, Operations / Plant Manager
- B. Castonguay, Manager, Administration
- .
- R. Nelson, Security Director
- H. Torberg, Security- Supervisor
- J. Frothingham, Manager, Quality Programs
- R. Crosby, Licensing Engineer
,
- S. Lellerc, Section Head, Quality Programs
- C. Urguhart, Chief of Security, Hall Security, Inc.
b.
U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Personnel
- C. Holden, Senior Resident Inspector
R. Freudenberger, Resident Inspector
The inspectors also interviewed other licensee and contractor
security personnel.
- Indicates those present at the exit interview
2.
Onsite Follow-up of Previously Identified Items
-
a.
(Closed) IFI 86-04-01: The licensee was requested to. review the
degree of protection afforded to certain plant safety equipment.
THIS PARAGRAPil CONTAlHS SAFEGUARDS
ist;EGil0!i Ak3 IS EST FOR PUBil0
LISCt0SijsE, IT IS liiTM10HilY
ltFTClMK.
NRC policy concerning vital equipment and vital areas is presently
l
undergoing staff review. When completed, and a position is
'
rendered, the vital area analysis for all plants, including Maine
Yankee, may be reevaluated.
It is possible that the ensuing policy
will require other equipment, in addition to that already identified
by the licensee, t.o be protected as vital. This item is therefore
closed since it will be included in that reevaluation when it is
conducted.
,
_ _
_ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ . - _ .
_ _ .
. _ _ . . _
.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ____ _ ___ - _ _
1
.
.
l
s
)
-
\\
'
3
J
)
-l
b.
(Closed) VIO 50-309/87-15-01: .The licensee failed to maintain a
locked barrier to vital equipment.
The licensee's stated corrective
actions were verified and found to be satisfactory.
(Refer to
j
licensee's November 18, 1987 letter to the NRC.)
1
c.
(Closed) VIO 50-309/87-15-02: The licensee failed to maintain a
minimum of three barriers to security vital areas.
The licensee's
stated corrective actions were verified and found to be satis-
!,
factory.
(Refer to the licensee's November 18, 1987 letter to the
NRC.)
d.
(Closed) VIO 50-309/87-15-03 and 50-309/8J-20-04: The licensee
failed to maintain adequate illumination in the protected area. The
see's stated corrective actions were verified and found to be
ifactory.
(Refer to the licensee's November 18, 1987 and
.
March 15, 1989 letters to the NRC.)
f
e.
-(Closed) VIO 50-309/87-15-04 and 50-309/88-19-02:
The licensee
failed to control access to certain areas of the p' ant with qualified
personnel. .The licensee's stated corrective actions were verified
and found to be satisfactory.
(Refer to the licensee's
November 18, 1987 and December T , 1988 letters to the NRC.)
f.
(Closed) VIO 50-309/88-19-01:
The licensee failed to maintain an
isolatio ione in a certain location in the protected area. The
-
licensee's stated cor.rective actions were verified and found to be-
satisfactory.
(Refer to the licensee's December 15,r1988 letter to
the NRC.)
-;
--
g.
(Closed) VIO 50-309/88-20-01:
The licens'ee failed to control keys
to security and vital areas, did not initiate immediate compensatory
security measures for missing keys to security and vital areas, and
did not report a security event to the NRC within one hour as
required in 10 CFR 73.71.
The licensee's stated corrective actions
were verified and found to be satisfactory.
(Refer to licensee's
March 15, 1989 letter to the NRC.)
h.
(Closed) VIO 50-309/88-20-02:
The licensee failed to conduct
adequate searches of personnel and packages entering the protected
area. The licensee's stated corrective actions were verified and
found to be satisfactory.
(Refer to the licensee's' March 15, 1989
letter to the NRC.)
The inspectors also identified a potential weakness during Inspection
k
No. 50-309/88-20 associated with searches of hand-carried items. The
inspectors found that the licensee had purchased and installed X-ray
search equipment in the main access control portal to enable more
thorough searches of hand-carried items. This potential weakness has
i
been corrected,
i
l
a
i
- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ - _
_ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _
. _ _ _
- _ _ _ _ _
- - .
-
_ - _
s
.,
1
,
.
.
4-
i..
(Closed) VIO 50-309/88-20-03:
The licensee failed to control
vehicles within the protected area.
The licensee's stated corrective.
actions were verified and found to be satisfactory.
(Refer.to the
licensee's March 15, 1989 letter to the NRC.)
j.
(Closed) VIO 50-309/88-20-05:
The licensee failed to maintain an
unobscured view of the protected area barrier and adjacent area in a
certain location within the protected area.
The licensee's stated
corrective actions were verified and found to be satisfactory.
(Refer to the licensee's March 15, 1989 letter to the NRC.)
k.
(0 pen) UNR 50-309/88-20-01: The licensee was to provide missing
documentation and conduct an evaluation of the screening program for
unescorted plant access for licensee and contractor personnel.
The
licensee had completed an assessment of the program; however, at the
time of this inspection, corrective actions for identified program
deficiencies f.ad not been fully implemented.
This item wi?1 remain
open until the licensee's corrective actions are irr.plemented end
verified.
1.
Licensee commitments made at a December 20, 1988, Enforcement
Conference and in response to a civil penalty issued in
February 1989 are being implemented on schedule. Upgrading of the
security program was verified by the inspectors to be consisterit -
with the status provided by the licensee in a meeting on
March 6, 1989 in Region I.
That meeting was requested by the
licensee to present to regional' management _the progress on the
corrective actions-for violations included in the civil penalty.
The status of those commitments will be reviewed further during
subsequent inspections.
(Refer to the licensee's March 15, 1989
letter to the NRC.)
3.
Management Support, Security Program Plans, and Audits
Management Support - Management Support for the licensee's physical
a.
security program was dete'11ned to be adequate by the inspectors.
This determination was based upon the inspectors' reviews of various
aspects of the licensee's program and the ongoing upgrades to the
security program.
b.
Security program Plans - The inspectors verified that the licensee
was in the process of completing a 10 CFR 50.54(p) change to its
Security, Contingency, and Guard Training and Qualifications plans.
The licensee expects to submit the change to the NRC by
April 1, 1989.
!
!
i
_____,_.__,._------,----------~'--~-~~n
.
.
,
s
,
.
5
l
Audits - The inspectors reviewed the 1989 annual security program
l
c.
audit report and verified that the audit had been conducted in
!
accordance with the NRC-approved security. plan (the Plan). The audit
'
was comprehensive in scope and the results were reported to the
appropriate levels of management. At the time of the inspection, the
security organization had not yet responded to the audit findings,
therefore, the inspectors could not determine the appropriateness of
follow-up corrective actions.
The corrective actions taken to remedy
adverse findings will be reviewed during subsequent inspections.
' 4.
Protected Area Physical Barriers, Detection
and Assessment Aids
Protected Area Barriers - The inspectors conducted a physical
a.
inspection of the protected area (PA) barrier on March 20, 1989.
The inspectors determined, by observation, that the barriers were
installed and maintained as described in the Plan.
b.
Protected Area Detection Aids - The inspectors observed the PA
perimeter detection aids on March 23, 1989, and determined that they
were installed, maintained and operated as committed to in the Plan.
Isolation Zones - The inspectors verified that isolation zones were
c.
adequately maintained to permit observation of activities on both
sides of the PA barrier.
--
-
d.
Protected Area and Isolation Zone Lighting - The inspectors -
conducted a lighting survey of the PA and isolation zones on
--
March 20, 1989.
The inspectors determined, by observation, that
lighting in the PA and isolation zones was as committed to in the
Plan.
The inspectors noted that PA and isolation zone lighting had
been significantly upgraded since the November 14-18, 1988
inspection (50-309/88-20).
Assessment Aids - The inspectors observed the PA perimeter
e.
' assessment aids and determined that they were generally as committed
to in the Plan.
Il!!S PA!!AGRAPH CONTAlliS SAFEGUARDS
!%fEUAil03 AiG IS !!0T FOR PJ'BilC
DISCLOSUi!E, IT IS INTENil0NALLY
LEFTBLANK.
5.
Protected Area Access Control of Personnel,
Packages and Vehicles
The inspectors determined that the licensee was exercising positive
a.
control over personnel access to the PA.
This determination was
based on the following:
.
mmmm.,_m_m._ _ . _ _ . _ . - - . . .
- - - - - -
-_
_ - _ - - - - _ - -
-
.
.-
4
,
6
1)
The inspectors verified that personnel are properly identified
and authorization is checked prior to issuance of badges and
key-cards.
2)
The inspectors reviewed the security lock and key procedures
and determined.that they were consistent with commitments in
the Plan.
The inspectors also reviewed the PA and Vital Area
(VA) inventory logs, and discussed lock.and key procedures with
members of the security force, operations personnel, and the
licensee's security staff.
3)
The inspectors verified that the licensee has a search program,
as committed to in the Plan, for firearms, explosives,
. incendiary devices and other unauthorized materials. The
inspectors observed personnel access and visitor processing,
and interviewed members of the security force and the
licensee's security staff about personnel access procedures.
4)
The inspectors determined, by observation, that individuals in
the PA display their access badges as required.
b.
The inspectors determined that the licensee was exercising positive
control over packages and material that are brought into the PA.
'The inspectors reviewed the package and material control procedures
and found that they were consistent with commitments in the Plan.
The inspectors also observed package and material processing and
interviewed members of the security force and the licensee's
security staff about package and material control procedures.
c.
The inspectors observed vehicles being processed into the PA on
several occasions during March 20-24, 1989.
I!OS PAllAGRAPH CORAMS WE0!JW3
IUCRMEi la 13 LDT E011 FUMB
DISCLUSVRE, IT IS lEEhT6Ulti
LEflElAK
The inspectors reviewed the NRC-approved Plan and implementing
procedures and found the following requirements:
IIIISEIEACf!$filCM,U!i$$U[@fgg
USTiid9 m is i"g rcg pg3),Jg
DISCiDSiiRE, if is lHigilm, tty
l
LETI BIAR
_ _. - __
_ _ - _ = _ _ _ _ _
. . .
,
.,
.
1,
e
- ,;
..
'
7. -
j
7
,
- 1
1U!S PIA',M!Jil 00.'i!53 SAFE 06!aOS
-]
IUTCMATi0'i AS IS EST FOR PUBilC
]
DISCLOSU!iE, II 13 lhT9iliMAllY
i
LEIT BLAK
j
The inspectors determined that the licensee's failure to comply with
'
the above requirements in the NRC-approved security plan and its
implementing procedures, resulted in a vehicle entering the protected
area without a proper search of the cargo and cargo. area. This is an
apparent violation of NRC requirements (50-309/89-07-01).
i
6.
Exit Interview
The. inspectors met'with the licensee representatives indicated in
paraoraph 1 at the conclusion of the inspection on March 24, 1989. At
that time, the purpose and scope of the inspection were reviewed and the
findings were presented.
At no time during this inspection was written material provided to the
licensee by the inspectors.
.
-m
4
M
W1
a
"
9 W
y
e
-
g
,
t
.
f
t
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - -
_ _ _ - _ - _ _ - _ _ _ _ - _ - - -
_ -_--__-_____
_
_
_
_ _ _ _ .
_ - __ _ ____