IR 05000186/1977007

Partially Withheld Insp Rept 50-186/77-07 on 771206-08. Noncompliance Noted:Licensee Did Not Provide Annual Requalifications for Univ Watchman Svc & Did Not Search Each Individual Before Exiting from Matl Access Area

ML20215J219
Person / Time
Site:	University of Missouri-Columbia
Issue date:	01/10/1978
From:	Dunleavy J, Hind J, Madeda T NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III)
To:
Shared Package
ML20215J138	List: IA-86-421, Ack Receipt of Informing NRC of Steps Taken to Correct Noncompliance Noted in IR 05000186/1975003 IR 05000186/1976001 IR 05000186/1977007 IR 05000186/1978004 IR 05000186/1979001 IR 05000186/1980003 IR 05000186/1981002 IR 05000186/1983001 IR 05000186/1985003 IR 05000186/1985004 ML20215J136 ML20215J159 ML20215J183 ML20215J188 ML20215J201 ML20215J210 ML20215J230 ML20215J237 ML20215J240 ML20215J243 ML20215J248 ML20215J262 ML20215J265 ML20215J332
References
FOIA-86-421 50-186-77-07, 50-186-77-7, NUDOCS 8610240355
Download: ML20215J219 (10)

Text

{{#Wiki_filter:N l i

.  \fhAh_, ., .. . . ,- .- c. --; ; ::=;5hi$b?$A5$Yit{
 !

. U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY CO?ciISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT

REGION III

Report No. 50-186/77-07 Docket No. 50-186 License No. R-103 Licensee: The Curators of the University of Missouri-Columbia 309 University Hall University of Missouri Columbia, MO 65202 Facility Name: Research Reactor Facility Inspection At': Research Reactor Fa ility Site, Columbia, Missouri Inspection Conducted: December 6-8, 1977

  - -

h-44- f /'? k Inspectors: T. Madeda // y a / g/70- -

    , ,-
  ' "

g,.4 MS J. J. Dunleavy

  .
    //>//[

Approved By: g/4L / A. tind, Chief __/ /(, f Safeguards Branch Inspection Summary In_syection on December 6_-8_, 1977 (Ry ort No. 050-186/77-07) Areas Inspected: Routine, unannounced inspection of the approved security plan and its implementation relative to the protection of SP!; security organization; access control; alarm systems; Leys, locks and hardware; communications; surveillance; procedures, securit y program review; and protection against radiolopical sabotage. The inspection involved 44 inspector-hours onsit e by two NRC inspector Results: Of the eleven areas inspected, no apparent items of noncompliance were identified in seven areas; five items of noncompliance werc identified in four a:eas (Security Organization - Paragraph 4; Access Controls - Paragraph 5; Alarm Systems - Paragraph 6.a and 6.b; Surveillance - Para-graph 9) Three item:, a re cons idered to be inf ract f ons and two iten, 86102403SS 861010 PDR FOIA BENNISH86-421 PDR

i (

.
'

are considered to be deficiencies. One unresolved item was identified relating to response require:nent Attachment: Details FMTN E@OIk (Part 2.790(d) Information) 1"Et??" M d6 CfDI Toi>i'ec q 4dmy3g1iT.". M

    '3 [W*DdeifMktiT 5 15idat'f0CEE"4 CfpCf.LiAl'fil656ffEEiil'MD
    .APPROVAlitDFli RI S E E N-2-
 .,, . ,,

.

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

 (   (-
.
-
 , M khh.hh   n DETAILS Persons Contacted
*Dr. Brugger, Director, Research Reactor Facility
*Dr. Alger, Associate Director
*C. Thompson, Chairman, Reactor Advisory Committee
*C. Julian, Reactor Manager
*R. Moorehead, Shift Supervisor B. Bezenek, Shift Supervisor J. McKibben, Reactor Operations Engineer
*J. Schlapper, Reactor Physicist C. Anderson, Kaactor Operator R. McCann, Reactor Operator J. Marchand, Secretary to the Director S. Bullock, Reactor Secretary J. Beckett, Assistant Director, Personnel, Physical Plant A. Kleschel, Assistant Director, Fiscal, Physical Plant L. Maddox, Superintendent of Buildings and Grounds R. Mason, Chief of Police, University of Missouri-Columbia (UM-C)

M. Wagner, Sergeant, (UM-C) L. Stone, Senior Dispatcher (UM-C) Donald, Patrolman (UM-C)' F. Klemme, Patrolman (UM-C)

,

J. Fry, Patrolman (UM-C) ' G. Duffus, Watchman (UM-C)

* Denotes those present at the exit intervie . Security Plan The inspectors reviewed and evaluated the licensee's approved security plan which was submitted by 1ctter dated September 20, 1974 and revisions submitted by letters dated March 31, 1976 and November 5, 197 Further, the inspectors ascertained that there had been a change made to the physical security plan subsequent to the last security inspection. By letter to NRR dated September 30, 1977, the licensee requested a temporary change to the Security. Plan, which stated, e,ffective September L 3 1977, authorized personnel would occupy ther % *M'.d  13 at all times. The building is, therefore, no longer an unoccupied vital area over weekend nor(ods. Thus, as long as this schedule is followed, the(EKwfyM31 building intrusion alarm will not be activated durinn weekend periods and accesg c will be controlled byn _G e M M f D xf~ T Z G?< x a mr % 1ock as has been th& case in the past during normal operating hour . . - m .
    ,

g y: G [ K Q i M,....xlL&W~n% +-ef.4 p&

 ... m
  - 3-
  '
  =  tan ===~

__ . . . _ _ -

~- g 't mepo w ag&- ., .&t%Q, Q:yidistUiJJseg4j

   ,w . , -
.
.
, The length of time that the revised schedule will remain in effect is uncertaf,n at this time. The intrusion alarm system for the ( building will not be dismantled. Should a period occur
     ~

when the building is not occupied, the alarm system will be activated and a test for operability and functional performance will be made at that tim NRR responded to this temporary change telephonically on October 26, 1977. NRR agreed that the temporary change in schedule will not decrease the effectiveness.of the security program. As of this inspection the licensee has not received formal written approval from NR .The inspectors also reviewed the licensee's security areas and essential and vital equipment to assure that they are properly designated in the approved security pla No items of noncompliance or deviations were identifie . Protection of Ste! The inspectors determined that the SRI actually possessed by the licensee is above the threshold quantities outlined in 73.l(b); therefore, the licensee must comply with the require =ents not previously exempted by NRR related to 10 CFR 73.50, 3.60, and f 73.7 ; During the inspection it was determined that the licensee has 12.39 kg of U-235 and 14.0-grams of Pu stored outside the reactor in a vault-type' roo The remaining fuel is either inserted in the r'eactor core'or in the. storage pool. This fuel is irradiated to a self protection Icvel of above 100 Rem /hr at 3 f No items of noncompliance or deviations were identifie . Security Organization The RIII inspectors determined that the licensee is conforming to commitments stated in the approved security plan and applicable 10 CFR 73 requirements concerning the overall structure and functional responsibilities of the securit y organi::ation. This was determined through interviews with staff and operational personnel responsible for the implementation of the day-to-day security progra The inspectors also reviewed the duties and training records of the University Security force, which consists of an armed police force end an unarmed watchman servic It was revealed through S ' h E IkbNbNbMmwczmwh[i.L>D-4-

  %

ggg{-{QdJi.s%AihNp8'

.
.

interviews with a watchman and the Superintendent of Buildings'and Grounds that University Watchman Service personnel are not given any annual requalification training concerning applicable sections of the licensee's security plan. Since the licensee has no requali-fication program for watchmen there is no documentatio These findings represent apparent noncompliance with Section IV,- Part II(C) of the University cf Missouri-Columbia Securitv Plan

"which states in part:     b(/

and 10 CFR 73.50(a)(4) which states in part: "Each guard and watchman shall be requalified at least annuall Such requalification shall be documented." Access Controls Evaluation of the access control system was e.onducted by visual observation, personnel interviews, and physical testing. Access controls developed by the licensee are such as to admit only authorized persons and exclude unauthorized persons. The licensee is maintaining a record to document access and facilitate identification of visitor A eview of the licensee's access control procedures governing admittance to and exit f rom the material access area, (containing dificrent types of unirradiated SNM), revealed that each individual ( is not searched before exiting from the material access are It should be n ed that while t e mater,ial access a ca is monitored by CCTV by the in the such monitoring

   ^
   " -

is These findings represent apparent noncompliance with 10 CFR 73.60(b) which states: "Each individual, package, and vehicle shall be searched for concealed special nuclear material before exiting from a material access area unless exit is into a contiguous material access area. The search may be carried out by a physical search or by use of equipment capable of detecting the presence of con-cealed special nuclear material."

~ Additionally, Section ;I1I,' Part I, A(4)(b) of the _ University of

      - O, Missouri-Columbia Security Plan states in narry_3  i
      ; /g_ j s> 2.' .l%~ [: cy&','&(Qa&m
 &w f ~ tOlQQ. QLQ& &hfklQ*E.Nfhih > - - - - - A_larm S,vstem The licensee has installed an active intrusion alarm systen for Y  $

O n ?;$ ~, $ m$ ' m ann.- $

   -5-
   -

_ r _ . _ ., $ , %

      '
      ~ '
  ..a .- .  ... .n.-. .____d' -

_._:__

  'W t',c xf,.-3;.W-;
     '

0. ";;, , ;m a-:. w.-

     -
     ;g.w.w U'. % 3 : *p .0;;N W W( .ea so         ,
      ,.g . . . .  * -

. both the c'- - ,buildingandan[[ WQ yy"f hloqated in the p- w p building which is considered a { ._ Lq r \ There are intrusion alarms at the @ c -" e R_'po r t a l s into reactor

, # % . d All remaining portals which are used for other than      ~

personnel and equipment movements are secured from the insid r has an intrusion alarm system which detects The s,270 r,s W pW , . the Boths intrusion alarm systems annunciate r. o

,.

m i[f " [ f (a q, @k g,h[y {t%fyZ[{[et

        -

M ',~ . W' ' '

             -
             .1

_

      '
      <
       ' in {' '   jc'[[;iscontinuaus1y

_ _f% C manne M ine t{ ...a..)? > @[alap will also indicated'f R ! )in the event of a 'M 'i n .eW '

       . , y -. Y ' ; U Nf(O ,: ]
@ h[j 7CD} 2 bit;  p as would

_ occur 11 an individuai attempted to vtamperswit n thetasidD Ef f ective as of September 1, ,1977. the

'fT;L"1 Q buih'ing intrusion alarm has been placed in af'N
  '

code since/ authorized personnel now occupy the KwN Moulici!Tg at all time (See Paragraph 2 for further details). Evaluation of the alarm systems was conducted by personnel interviews, visual observation and physical testing of the intrusion alarm syste It was revealed through a review of the licensee's'K M ;' - Tthat on three occasions during a six month period (July 1977 to December 1977) the g duasnot tested as required. These dates are as tollows:

(1) May 7, 1977 to May 16, 1977: 9 Days (2) August 2, 1977 to August 12, 1977:      10 Days (3) September 19, 1977 to September 27, 1977:       8 Days These findings represent apparent noncompliance with Section,I"V,.

Part <II(A)(1) of the University of M esouri-Columbia. Physical ,

, Security y Plan 'vhich
    ., states in part : (w, g ,

m ,. y s

          . ,j7 s ;.gl ,

a Q ,/ (:,

-

m ju

  .. .
    .

p 3yy,

       . . ,
         ,

sr r-

         , ; <a
           -

3.r ,9 3,q' g.,u,yy '-)y N; :s

      ,

P 8 %m,I t

   -
     ,

t

      '3 . ~j; C . a
          >
    ,', y
        ,   ,
" 2
 )4' 4-   '
     -
      '
        ;
         ...g  ,
  . - -
     ,  ..      ,
, -
 ,   . .; .- s . _ ,
 '  I^'
!
    Mand 10 LFR / 3. t>0 (d ) ( 2 ) which states:      "Each intrusion alarm shall be inspected and tested for operability and required functional performance at the beginning and end of each interval durin;, which it i s used for material protectfor but not le-  ,

frequently than once every seven (7) days." During a test of the alarm system protecting the unoccupied material accev- .rea, ' the inspector observed that the intrusion m v r- '

    ....
     ,, .'. ,-  - . ,
        , ,

e .o-

          ,

1 -*

  %  <

w a,2 c s v a -+ ' ' i '* ,

       *
        ' ~ ' , , '; i 4 1 *f s ' d
  .,.
  ,,.. w       <
     - h -
   ,-<,,w .
     -

m-9 y . g ,

     \~')   .p
  .,
  -  - +

m:-m -,.r' up--- o, ,JW MM E'E%. U 'N '*

             ' *S'N

QQR"\f f 'G C i Ti4ii U ,-s k w W _v Af M W 'Xz '.' J

   =-.-r-- ---~'y.3,
.
       '

alarm was not in operable condition in that the alarm did not activate'thereby allowing the I;RC inspector to gain undetected access to the material recess are This finding represents apparent noncompliance with 10 CFR 73.60(c) which states in part: "Each unoccupied material access area nhall he locked and protected by an intrusion alarm on active status," and 10 CFR 73.60(d)(1) which states: " Intrusion alarms, physical barriers, and other devices used for material protection shall be maintained in operable condition."

Additionally, Section IV, Part II(A)(1) of the Universitv 7,

        "#,

of Missouri-Columbia Securit f Plan states in part: g t , dQ u '

       ~

m% _

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

_y 9 [d:[ //C)[ , [h > * V d - l~k [ -- g (0 y y ,;g \ ,

   ,, , ;Q,*b;w[%.- s + R[;V[c ;fy '. ',m, + 3: % -j ' ,:i f,j fk Lee .
 $m(ykN ._

A q :h:$Y

  ~_m h--

_Y N'O

   ,,-
     '
      .. Key,, Locks, and liardware The inspectors reviewed lock and key procedures, as they pertain to the licensee's security plan, by visual observations and personnel interview During interviews with staff and operational representatives, it was confirmed that the combinations of combination locks are changed according to security plan commitraent It was further observed by the RIII inspectors that vital areas keys are aJequately controlled to reduce the possibility of compromise.

! fio iter.s of noncompliance or deviations were identifie . Communications Communications can be established with the University Police Department and Watchmen Service by means of various telephones disperscd- throuch- -) out the facilit A telephone is located in thop, (. %

      -
       , A- ,

An alternative method available, which could be used to su= on the University Police Depart.nent, is to activate an(It _1 l_ 3) -In addition to the telephonen, th"ro i a public addre a systen and intercom nysten which ceuld he utilined internally to co:: mun icat e an eme rgency . Tho University Police Departnent has the capability of dirm * mu' i - cations with local, county and state law entorcenent auth>r. ie The Police Do ". , r t no n t Cormunications center has the capability of Pw- - :7communicat ions wit h bot h police persenn~1 and

  ..

constant w watchmen in the fiel l;o i t en ; of nonconpliance or deviations w. re ident if ie . . . ,. . g, ee- - t - h

 -.

v.m,.

  ,

_ _ .

   , . .
    -
    ..

   ; -
     '
  "N%_u.m= ;   O

   ^-,__.,  - ,

7W=L

  -.5 22tCUr.2 % % M W M TX Ti(2Ta m
-

b d Mk M

* Surveillance The inspectors evaluated the surveillance system to determine if the licensee is conforming to commitments stated in the approved security pla It was revealed through an interview with a university watchman and a check of his " Daily Patrol Logs" 9at on numerous occasions on the 3 p.m. to 11 p.m. shift from November 21, 1977 to December 7. 1977, watchmen patrols rounds were not being performed at the M ' intervals as require It should be noted that the use of tne " Daily Patrol Log" by watchmen is a newly instituted procedur The " Daily Patrol Logs" rgficctod nntrols were beine made gf the facility at approximately      which is less than the required frequenc It was further noted by'the inspectors that patrol rounds are not being recorded by means of the
   ,'but are being recorded on a daily patrol lo '

These . findings represent apparent noncompliance with Section/I1I, # Part I(A)(2)(c), of the University of Missouri-Columbia, Physical Security Plan Ghich states in part: {/ f

 ,, 5 , J , 7 - .
   ,. *
    ' -
    ~
    " g l
       *
 '

l I' ,s 3 .I' ,,4 s ', 't y ' is/Ms.gsgpg!h._fy -Q, It should be noted " Normal working

 '
   ,
      .

_, ; T hours" are Monday through Friday 8:00 a.m.to 5:00 p.m., when the receptionist is present in the lobby are ( 1 Procedures The inspectors reviewed and evaluated the reactor security procedures outlined in the approved security plan which pertain to the (1) response to unauthorized intrusions of security areas; (2) bomb threats; and (3) acts of civil disorders. By review of operating procedures and through interviews with operating, supervisory, and security personnel responsible for the initial and/or any backup response in such situations, the inspectors determined that procedures have been implemented and that the procedures are understood by all

,

responsibic individual No items of noncompliance or deviations were identifie I heurity Program Review The inspectors determined through documentation records and interviews i with the Reactor Manager, the Facility Director, and the University l of Missouri Police Department that an audit of all phases of the

;

University of Missouri Research Reactor Security Program was performed,

!

_ _ , - - . . , , _

   *

kudef ~ E .E N.._ ~N. c _e, a. y . f w- . cg m } f ,a r 4 o , 5 , E.p -s _ j 4 Q

  .

3.., ,,y._L

   .g w ww
    .,e> i'l wn 7 ' ' 3 jy 4, Q,[w. f ' +r
     '
       .

m j _g I i l j__._- -;; mALh, l

- -
       -   --

ph ~e-Aqmqw12.A %. W.tN

    ; - * -
     $. " * . i
.
.

as required, by July 27, 1976. The audit was performed by Michael C. Wagner, Patrolman, University of Missouri Police Departmen Additionally, it was also determined that the annual review of the security plan and associated security procedures was performed by the Facility Directo The Facility Director and the Reactor Manager were unable, however, to locate appropriate documentation. Based upon their certification of the review, the NRC inspectors requested that the files be searched for such documentation or that an appro-priate memorandum be added to file No items of noncompliance or deviations were identifie . Protection Against Radiological Sabotage During the inspection of access control measures and procedures, the insoectors determined that all means of access to the reactor core are adequately controlled. Access to the / d.a :e limited to those individucls auth rized 9 to be in the

 , Research Reactor Facilit The use of the' h is further limited to authorized individ6als whose names are mainta ned on an access list in th The actual operation of the M reactor control room.}is performed by the control room upon request by a duly authorizec perso . Unresolved Item i  Response Requirement 10 CFR 73.50(g)(1)

The licensee's approved securitv nian states in Section.TTT.'Part f T(B)(2): L; [ f .:. . _ 2 L .; ! ;. " l~L' '

   .
       ' '
         .
          ~
          - : l l hy , /
       -
  . , . , . , .
   .
     . , .. . ,.     - '.

Vz ,; v' ' ' _ . , ,, . , ,,.e .

        f', _
         'A ;.5 '
           '> _,
           -
        .
          .

w r, i ry ' . .., %. 6 . . . . ;' '. w .- o

     ..
     .   . .,
        . , .
          -

mg re $ W 9 %

      ~
         * J 4.y ty: Wf. 'em ' ; :GXQ'
 .. ; . . .

4t;p\Ph w;W . ?.y .

    ^:'Offgg. 44 & . ,. . . < f 'J'Mi;; Q ,t'-
       '
       '  ;a J,y' b . , , +c Qy4 c 4 d 6. hh
           .
 [$ [  -

3fq}yyggyl l1 K g Q)fi k ji.&:p , During the inspection, i t .wv revealed that on limited occasions (holidays) there are only' armed of ficers on duty each shif t, i which includes the duty otticer in charge of the shif i

      . _ . . - . - ,   . -
      '

g pwn':x.u'

    '  0   Jis r*  ;,. da

1 - _

-
- ---_ _ _ .

    '

   :  !
     , v== w.-
      *s

_ ,, .; ; .

.
.

It is the lic'ensee's position that the armed' officers" referred not only to the University Police Department, but also to the local t agencies

- This item had been referred to NRC IIcadquarters for evaluation and resolutio . Exit Interview The inspectors met with the licensee representatives (Denoted in Paragraph 1) at' the conclusion of the inspection on December 8, 1977. The inspectors summarized the purpose and the scope of the inspection and the findings. There was no substantial rebuttal to the apparent items of noncompliance. The licensee represen-tatives did state they would correct the 1   2 as soon as possibl With regard to the unresolved item, the Ix nsee stated they will be in contact with NR (
 .n . ~ . ^

a v+ %f'k * "-+' 0 '4 t ', .q* 4

   ,
    y fg*~ ~$ y g *yeag__ ye ,pg, d)j,il[b    i A ^

ij~'3"f26.et.6:jisd.BhiQs;calf a. am s. n. 1"' s

    - 10 -

C - a =- J, n= bn&'-im }}