IR 05000123/1999201
| ML20195F252 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | University of Missouri-Rolla |
| Issue date: | 06/09/1999 |
| From: | NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20195F245 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-123-99-201, NUDOCS 9906140242 | |
| Download: ML20195F252 (17) | |
Text
7:
.:
.O'
.e ,
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Docket No: '50-123-License No: . R-79 '
Report No: 50-123/99201 Licensee: University of Missouri-Rolla
-.
Facility: Nuclear Reactor Facility
Location: Rolla, Missouri Dates: May 17-20,1999 Insp3ctor: Thomas M. Burdick i
' Approved by: - Ledyard B. Marsh, Director Events Assessment, Generic Communications and Non-Power Reactors Branch Division of Regulatory improvement Programs Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation j
'l
j i
i
,
!
-
r
)
. :e.; < - n
, _
w ,
- ,
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY -
This routirie, announced inspection included onsite review of selected aspects of the
!: , : operations program,' organizational structure and functions program, design control'
. program, review and audit program, radiation protection program, environmental
"
protection program, operator requalification program, maintenance program; surveillance .
. ' program, fuel handling program, experimental program, procedural. control program,~.
emergency preparedness program,' safeguards program, security program, and transportation progra .LThe licensee's programs were acceptably directed toward'the protection of public health and safety, and in comWiance with NRC requirements since the last NRC inspection of this progra ~
- QRGANIZATIONAL ST' RUCTURE AND FUNCTIONS
,
- The' licensee recently obtained NRC approval to eliminate the Reactor Manager position
- and named the acting Reactor Director as the permanent Directo The licensee has been preparing for license renewal of the facility which is due later this
'
,
yea OPERA GONS
- The licensee contin'ued to operate the' reactor intermittently to support teaching labs for
' undergraduate students and graduate student researc : DESIGN CONTROL'
~
..The licensee had a well developed protocol for reviewing and approving modification The licensee had concluded that the reactor facility will not be impacted by the year 2000 computer problem since no' microprocessors or computers were incorporated in the facility
. system REVIEW AND AUDIT-
- Required audits were conducted at the specified interval ~
RADIATION PROTECTION ALARA practices at the facility ensured minimal radiation exposures to staff, students, and faculty personnel as well as the publi ,
I J
[, , . s.
};-
-2-ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION The reactor facility operation has had a minimal impact on the environmen OPERATOR REQUALIFICATION The licensee's requalification program was formally administered through scheduled lectures and regular examinations of the operating staff.'
MAINTENANCE Maintenance of the facility was performed effectively and recorded in detail by the license SURVElLLANCE Surveillance was conducted as dictated by technical specifications and often on a greater frequency than require FUEL HANDLING Routine fuel handling was done by the licensee as prescribed by their procedures and technical specification EXPERIMENTS Routine experiments were conducted in accordance with their requirement PROCEDURES Procedures were well established and detailed. Although tracking of procedure change initiatives was not comprehensive in one instance, the change that was made ensured that corrective actions were effective. The licensee is evaluating ways to ensule that all
. planned procedural change are accomplished in a timely manne EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS
-
The licensee ensured emergency response readiness was maintained through regular drills and trainin SAFEGUARDS AND SECURITY The licensee had met the requirements of their program but recently requested NRC permission to remove the program requirement from their license as allowea for the amount of material possessed.
L 1
ry
%.
..
-3-
.
_ TRANSPORTATION The licensee had not conducted transportation of radioactive materials 'si.nce the last inspection and does not intend to do so in the foreseeable futur .
'
x
.
,
Reoort Details
- Summary of Plant Status Since the last inspection the reactor was operated several hours per week to support experiments, education, operator training, and surveillanc .0 ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE AND FUNCTIONS Scooe (69001)
The inspector reviewed selected aspects of:
e - organization and staffing
'e qualifications e management responsibilities e administrative controls Observations and Findinos The organizational structure and staffing had changed since the last inspection. The acting Reactor Director became the permanent Director and the Reactor Manager position was eliminated following NRC approval. The organizational structure and staffing at the facility and as reported in the Annual Report were as required by Technical Specification. Qualifications of the staff met Technical Specification requirements. Review of records verified that management responsibilities were administered as required by Technical Specifications (TS) and applicable procedure .
'
The licensee has been preparing for a timely submittal of their facility license renewal application this Fall > " Conclusions The organizational structure and functions were consistent with Technical Specification requirement . OPERATIONS (69001) Scope
.
- The inspector reviewed selected aspects of:
e . operational logs and records e- staffing for operations - selected' operational, startup, or shutdown activities r: ,
w z ,a7
- ,
- ,
.
. . , .f ,
'
-
2 'c
~ b'. ! Observations and Findinos -
The operating logs and records were clear and provided an indication of operational activities. This included documentation of events, and resolution or tracking.of
^ events.: The logs and records indicated that_ shift staffing (including on-call
- personnel) was as required by the TSs. Logs and records also showed that--
operational conditions and parameters were consistent with license and Technical
>f Specification requirementen The inspector observed reactor pre-start checks, a reactor startup, and power operation that further confirmed that these conditions e and requirements were satisfie .
' '~ Conclusions
,
. The operations program satisfied Technical Specification requirement . 1
'
3.- DESIGN CONTROL (69001) .
? Scope The inspector reviewed selected aspects of:
e. - facility design changes and records '
'e: facility configuration
. b'. Observations and Findinos :
a Records and observations showed that changes at the facility.were acceptably-reviewed in accordance.with-10 CFR 50.59 and applicable licensee administrative
_
' controls. None of the changes constituted an unreviewed safety question or
< required a change to the TS. The licensee used a formal, detailed, and systematic review and approval procedur ' The licensee reviewed the facility systems for year 2000 problems and concluded j that'no microprocessors or computers had been used that could be affected, i
'
'
'The licensee' raised the question of adding an office window to the confinement ,
"
building exterior wall and installing a bathroom vent _ fan that would exhaust to the outside. .The inspector recommended including these proposals in the license ;
renewal application for NRC review and approval since they may affect the !
. confinement performance.-
l I
, ' c '.~ Conclusion's '
.,
The design change program satisfied NRC requirement i
<
' '
s
r7 . , .'
,
-3-4.- REVIEW AND AUDIT . Scooe (69001) -
The inspector reviewed selected aspects of:
'e
.
safety review records e audit recordsL e responses to safety reviews and audits e' ' review and audit personnel qualifications Observations and Findinas Records showed that the safety reviews were conducted at the Technical Specification required frequency. Topics of these reviews were also consistent with Technical Specification requirements to provide guidance, direction, and oversight, and to ensure acceptable use of the reacto The audit records showed that audits had been completed in those areas outlined in the TS and at the required frequenc The inspector noted that the safety reviews and audits and the associated findings
.were acceptably detailed and that the licensee responded and took corrective
. actions as neede The safety review and audit personnel qualifications satisfied Technical Specification requirements and licensee administrative controls. Further, the number of personnelinvolved in the safety reviews and audits also satisfied Technical Specification and licensee procedural requirement Conclusions The review and audit program satisfied Technical S' pecification requirement .
.
om ._ _ - _
- ...
-4- RADIATION PROTECTION Scope (69001)
The inspector reviewed selected aspects of:
i e the Radiation Protection Program I e: -radiologic'al signs and posting j e . routine surveys and monitoring i e dosimetry records l e maintenance and calibration of radiation monitoring equipment e As Low As Reasonably Achievable (ALARA) reviews Observations and Findinas The radiation protection program had not changed since the last inspection. The -
- licensee reviewed the radiation protection program at least annually in accordance with 10 CFR 20.1101(c). The review included all areas and no significant
.
weaknesses were reported. The licensee showed that the air emissions or radioactive material to the environment met the 10 millirem constraint specified in 10 CFR 20.1101(d).
l
- NRC Form 3, " Notice to Employees," was posted in accordance with 10 CFR 19.11. Caution signs, postings and controls to radiation areas were as required in 10 CFR 20, Subpart J. Licensee personnel observed the indicated l precautions for access to the radiation area i Use'of dosimeters and exit frisking practices were in accordance with radiation protection requirements. The licensee used a National Voluntary Laboratory Accreditation Program (NVLAP)-accredited vendor to process dosimetr I Radiological exposure records showed that occupational doses to the staff,.
students, and faculty.were minimal and doses to the public were insignifican Training records showed that personnel were acceptably trained in radiation protection practice Radiation monitoring and survey activities were as required. Equipment used for these activities were generally maintained, calibrated and used acceptably. The inspector noted that an RM-14 frisker, used for exit surveys from the reactor room, ;
did not respond when the probe was placed near a known radioactive source. The licensee determined that the connecting cable had become defective and corrected it immediately. According to the licensee a number of student tours were conducted in the preceding week during which the instrument was handled frequently. The licensee said the cable was probably damaged during that period
.of heavy activity. The unit had been calibrated at the prescribed interval and other portable detectors operated properly when checked by the inspecto , ,
J
. . \
..
i-5-
.
ALARA reviews were acceptably performed as required. .The inspector noted that the campus health physics office reviewed a 30 millirem extremity dose to the
. Reactor Director that was below the threshold for revie ~ .The licensee did not require a respiratory protection program or planned special exposure progra . Conclusions j l
The radiation protection program satisfied NRC requirement ~ ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Scope (69001)
The inspector reviewed selected aspects of:
e the environmental monitoring program annual reports e release records j
.*- - counting and analysis program * Observations and Findinas
'
Data indicated that there were no measurable doses above background. This was -
- acceptably documented in the Annual Reports. Observation of the facility found no new potential release path i l
The program for the monitoring and storage of radioactive liquid, gases, and solids was i consistent with applicable regulatory requirements. Radioactive material was
. monitored and released when below acceptable limits or was acceptably transferred !
- to the broad-scope license for disposition. The principles of As Low As Reasonably
' Achievable were acceptably implemented to minimize radioactive release Monitoring equipment was acceptably maintained and calibrated. Records were <
current and acceptably maintaine Conclusions -
~
The environmental prot'ection program satisfied NRC requirement ,
/
l
,,
.
$.<
' '
. qy.l ,
>
, ,
.
.'
.
,
. .;;
_
-6- 1
,
. ..
,*...
- 7. . OPERATOR REQUALIFICATION ]
j i
2 . Scone (69001) .
, :The inspector reviewed selected aspects of:
.
- i e :- the' Requalification Program {
- operator licenses -- )
-ei operator tmining records ei operator physical examination records
'e ' operator examination records e _. ' operator active duty status E '
l Qbservations and Findina The Requalification Program was maintained up-to-date. Operator licenses were also current. Records showed that operator training was consistent with the
. Requalification' Program requirements. Physical examinations of the operators were conducted as required. Records showed that written and operating examinations
. of the; operators were acceptably implemented. Written exams, that had been reviewed by a member of the nuclear engineering faculty before administration,
~
..were'particularly exceptional.' Logs showed that operators maintained active duty
. status as require . +
' Conclusions
.. Operator requalification was conducted as' required by the Requalification Progra . MAINTENANCE
' a. ' Scone (69001) '
The inspector reviewed selected aspects of:
j main'tenance procedures e' equipment maintenance records
,
i
,
"
..
,
,
l
,b J1
, ) '
'
..f ,
i
i
.O
- f
.
7
' Observations and Findinas
.
The licensee ha' d resolved a source 'of recurring reactor scrams when they identified
, and corrected an instrument power supply output voltage instability problem. Logs indicated that corrective maintenance activities and problems were addressed as required by procedure. Records showed that routine maintenance activities were conducted at the required frequency and in accordance with the TS, applicable >
procedures or equipment manuals. Corrective maintenance was detailed in an equipment history document. Maintenance activities ensured that equipment remained consistent with the Safety Analysis Report and Technical Specification requirements. Further, maintenance activities were consistent with the requirements of 10 CFR 50.5 Conclusions The maintenance program satisfied NRC requirement . SURVEILLANCE Scoce (69001) -
' The inspector reviewed selected ' aspects of:
'
e surveillance and calibration procedures, e surveillance, calibration and test data sheets and records
. b .' . Observations and Findinas-Surveillance, test and LCO verifications and calibrations were completed on schedule and in accordance with licensee procedures. All the recorded results were within the TS and procedurally prescribed parameters. The records and logs reviewed were complete and were'being maintained as required. Checks, tests, and calibrations were' completed as required by T The licensee had been developing a calorimetric procedure using a pool water heat J balance that may replace the existing pool water volumetric change method when
.-the licensee is satisfied with the anticipated accuracy improvemen ' Conclusions The surveillance program satisfied Technical Specification requirement , -
. <
. - _
.
i 4
.
,
. . '1 FUEL HANDLING -
J Scoes (69001)
. The inspector reviewed selected aspects of:
.
e .- fuel-handling procedures e fuel handling equipment and instrumentation
'a fuel handling and examination records e Observations and Findinas Fuel-handling procedures provided a prescribed method to move and handle fuel consistent with the provision of the TS and the licensee safety analyses. Fuel
, movement and fuel examination records showed that the fuel was moved and examined as required. Records also show that fuel-handling and monitoring equipment and instrumentation was verified operable prior to use. Personnel were k'nowledgeable of the procedural and equipment requirements for criticality control and assurance of fuelintegrity. Radiological and security precautions were also met in accordance with applicable procedure Conclusions
.The fuel handling program satisfied licensee Technical Specification and procedural requirement . EXPERIMENTS Scoce (69001)
The inspector reviewed selected aspects of:
e experimental program requirements e procedures .
e logs and records
.e ' experimental' administrative controls and precautions
,
.
!
.
-9- Observations and Findinos l l
l The experiments at the facility were routine procedures that had been in place for I several years. No new or unknown-type experiments had been initiated, reviewed, or approved since the last inspection. The experiments were completed tvith the cognizance of the Reactor Director and a Senior Reactor Operator and in accordance with TS requirements (e.g., reactivity limitations). The results of the experiments were documented in appropriate experimental logs, data sheets, or records. Engineering and radiation protection controls were implemented as required to limit exposure to radiatio The inspector observed the licensee nerforming one irradiation experiment using the rabbit tub c.' Conclusions
' The program for experiments satisfied TS and procedural requirement . PROCEDURES (69001) Scope The inspector reviewed selected aspects of:
e administrative controls e records for changes and. temporary changes ,
e procedural implementation I logs and record i Observations and Findinos Administrative controls of changes and temporary changes to procedures, and associated review and approval processes were generally as require The inspector rrted one licensee oversight where three procedures had been )
proposed for a change as part of a corrective action but only one of the procedures wes ultimately changed. There was no tracking system to ensure the procedures were modified as recommended. Although only the one procedure was modified it
= was sufficient to ensure the intended corrective action was effective. The licensee immediately corrected the oversight and began evaluating methods to prevent similar errors in the futur l L
r.-
.
-10-Training of personnel on procedures and changes was acceptabic. Personnel conducted activities in accordance with applicable procedures. Records showed that procedures for potential malfunctions (e.g., reactor equipment problems) were implemented as require Conclusions The procedural control and implementation program satisfied Technical Specification requirement . EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS (69001) Scope
The inspector reviewed selected aspects of: l l
e the Emergency Plan e implementing procedures
- emergency response facilities, supplies, equipment and instrumentation ]
a training records -
e offsite support )
e emergency drills and exercises l l Observations and Findinas j The Emergency Plan (E Plan) in use at the reactor and emergency facilities was the same as the version most recently approved by the NRC. The E-Plan was audited and reviewed as required implementir'g procedures were reviewed and revised as needed to employ the E-Plan effectively. Facilities, supplies, instrumentation and equipment were being maintained, controlled and inventoried as required in the E-Plan. Through records review and interviews with licensee personnel, emergency responders were determined to be knowledgeable of the proper actions to take in case of an emergency. Agreements with outside response organizations had been updated and maintained as necessary. Communications capabilities were acceptable with these support groups and had been tested as stipulated in the E-Plan. Emergency drills had been conducted as required by the E-Plan. Off-site support organization participation was also as required by the E-Plan. Critiques were held following the drills to discuss the strengths and weaknesses identified during the exercise and to develop possible solutions to any problems identifie The results of these critiques were documented and filed. Emergency preparedness and response training was being completed as required. Training for off-site and reactor staff personnel was conducted and documented as stipulated by the E-Pla ~ g .~ , - - > r ,
.- _
m
- /
- -g
- 11 - Conclusions The emergency preparedness program was conducted in accordance with the I.' '
Emergency Pla ,
- 14, 1 klATERIAL CONTROL (85102)'
.,: geog,
- The inspector reviewed selected aspects of:
e nuclear material inventory and locations
- e! accountability records Observations and Findings The inventory of material was verified. The material control and accountability -
program tracked locations and content of fuel, sources, and fission detectors under the research reactor license. The possession and use of special nuclear material
'
(SNM) was limited to the locations and' purposes authorized under the license.-
~
- The material control and accountability forms (DOE /NRC Forms' 741 and 742) were
- prepared and transmitted as required. . The reactor licensee also included the
- broad-scope SNM in'its accounting syste i Conclusions Special Nuclear Materials were acceptably controlled and inventorie / SECURITY (81401/81421) Scope
- The inspector reviewed selected aspects of; the Physical Protection' Plan
.e- : security systems, equipment and instrumentations o e , implementation of_the Physical Protection Plan '
b .' ' Observations'and Findinos Y :The Physica'l Protection Plan was the same as the latest revision approved by the
., NRC. Physical protection systems (barriers and alarms), equipment and instrumentation were as required by the Physical Protection Plan.' Access control
. was as required.- Imp'smenting procedures were consistent with the Physical Protection Plan. ' Acceptable security response and training was demonstrated othrough' alarm response and drill insponse in accordance with procedure g -- ,
-
- . . . - . .-- , -.
.
.
-12-In a May 11,1999 letter to the NRC, the licensee proposed removal of their security plan from their license requirements since their possession limit for special nuclear material of low strategic significance no longer required i . Conclusions Security activities and systems satisfied Physical Protection Plan requirement . TRANSPORTATION (86740) Scope The inspector reviewed selected aspects of:
e radioactive materials shipping procedures e radioactive materials transportation and transfer records 1 ' Qbservations and Findinas I The licensee had not conducted any shipping of radioactive material since th ) last inspection and does not plan to do so in the foreseeable futur .
I Conclusions The licensea had not implemented a transportation progra I
!
! !
!
l J
r:;
- .
.-
Partial List of Persons Contacted D. Freeman Reactor Director, UMRR R. Bono Environmental Health and Safety, U. of Mo.- Rolla The inspector also contacted other supervisory, technical and administrative staff personnel as well, inspection Procedures Used IP 69001 Class il Non-Power Reactors IP 86740 Inspection of Transportation Activities IP 85102 Material Control and Accounting IP 81401 .. Plans, Procedures, and Reviews IP'81421 Fixed Site Physical Protection of LSNM iP 86740 Transportation of Radioactive Materials items Opened and Closed Open None Closed None List of Documents Reviewed Safety Analysis Report Maintenance and Surveillance Records Safety Evaluation Report Emergency Procedures Reactor Operating License Training Program Technical Specifications Emergency Plan Administrative Procedures Dosimetry Records Operating Procedures and Records Training Records Maintenance Procedures Various Reports Surveillance Procedures t
List of Acronyms Used
!
ALARA As Low as Reasonably Achievable NRC Nuclear Regulatory Commission UMRR University of Missouri Research Reactor SAR . Safety Analysis Report SNM Special Nuclear Material TS Technical Specifications i
i
7'
)
- Joy Freund - NRC C
- mputer Security H: ads-Up Alert ~
Page 1 l
)
From: Network Announcement i To: HQ distribution, Regional Distribution l Date: Fri, Jun 11,1999 6:24 PM i Subject: NRC Computer Security Heads-Up Alert
!
Please direct replies to Louis Numkin (LMN). l NRC Computer Security Heads-Up Alert Several sources have confirmed that a new e-mail based virus is affecting computer users around the world, today, it will affect computers with Windows 95/98/NT operating systems. As reported by ComputerWorld, " Users are infected when they open e-mail attachments that appear te be a reply from i someone they sent mail to. The messages have the same subject line as the original message. The body of the message reads: ]
i
'l received your e-mail and shall send you a reply ASAP. Till then, take a look at the attached ripped docs.'
A file named zipped files.exe, which contains the (m'alicious code) worm, is attached." l Should any NRC employees receive such messages as herein described, please do not unzip or attempt to read / access the attachment. Though it seems innocent, Network Associates reports: "The (attached)
file has a Winzip icon which is designed to fool unsuspecting users to run it as a self-extracting file."
DataFellows states: "When the attachment is opened, the virus will browse through the inbnx of the Microsoft Outlook e-mail program and will send a reply to every message.... In addition to spreading like a chain letter, the virus will try to overwrite the user's files on any accessible drives, including all network drives. The files that are overwritten must have one of these extensions:
DOC - Microsoft Word documents, XLS - Microsoft Excel spreadsheets, PPT - Microsoft PowerPoint presentations, ASM - Assembler source files, CPP - C++ source files."
This Agency does not use Microsoft Outlook as an e-mail system so ZippedFiles will not spread furthe However, a recipient's files can still be damaged. Our best advice is, as we said about the Melissa virus, to simply delete any e-mail which appears as describeca above, and you should have no problem with the worm. After deleting the message, you might send an e-mail to the sender informing him/her that their system might be infected by the Explcre. Zip. Wor Insofar as your home computers are concemed, this same alert and recommendation applies. If you use the more common antivirus tools, such as McAfee, Network Associates, Dr Solomon, and DataFellows, you can download their latest updates that will catch this worm. Norman has also provided NRC with an update, which is available upon reques If you have any questions about this or other Computer Security concerns, please contact Lou Grosman (e-mail LHG, ,ahone 415-5826) or Louis Numkin (e-mail LMN, phone 415-5906).
-
.
k. . k