IR 05000186/1980001

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
IE Insp Rept 50-186/80-01 on 800115-17.No Noncompliance Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Maint,Surveillance,Audit & Review,Experiments & Event Rept Followup
ML19322E448
Person / Time
Site: University of Missouri-Columbia
Issue date: 02/11/1980
From: Baker K, Charles Brown
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III)
To:
Shared Package
ML19322E447 List:
References
50-186-80-01, 50-186-80-1, NUDOCS 8003280111
Download: ML19322E448 (3)


Text

  • P

,

U.S. NUCLEAR REGUI.ATORY C0t! MISSION OFTICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT

REGION III

Report No. 50-180/80-01 Docket No. 50-186 1.icense No. R-103 Licensee University of flissouri Research Park Columbia, rio 65201 Inspection Conducted: January 15-17, 1980

.;. kbbw

< /A'/., / t'T inspector:

C. 11. firown (ifN,d -

i Approved By:

K'.'R.

Baker, Acting Chicf,

. /l//1

'

Projects Section 3-2 Inspection Summary Inspection on January 15-17, 1980 (Report No. 50-186/80-01)

Areas inspected:

Routine unannounced inspection of operations, maintenance, surveillance, audit and review, experiments, and event report followup.

The inspection involved 20 inspector-hours onsite by one NRC inspector.

Results:

No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified in these areas.

lI,/

8003280

-.

.

. _.

.-.

<

DETAILS

,

1.

Persons Contacted

  • D. Alger, Associate Director, Research Reactor Facility
  • <P.

Keenan, Assistant to the Vice President--Research

  • C. Tompson, Chairman, Reactor Advisory Committee
  • M. Vonk, Operations Engineer
  • C. McKibben, Reactor Manager C. Edwards, Reactor Plant Engineer S. Gunn, Reactor Services Engirgeer P. McGintz, Reactor Physicist A. Meyer, Assistant Reactor Service Engineer
  • Denotes licensee representatives attending the management interview.

2.

Organization, Logs and Records The facility's organization was reviewed and verified to be consistent with Technical Specifications requirements.

Compliance with minimum staffing requirement during reactor operations was verified by obser-vation and log review. The operating logs and records were verified to be available for review.

Review of the logs and records revealed they were being maintained satisfactorily. The maintenance logs indicated that the followup system maintained the verification re-quirements current. The equipment records appeared to be satis-factorily and up-to-date.

The review of selected maintenance procedures showed that functional verification tests and checks are required upon the completion of the activity to verify operability.

No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified in this area.

3.

Review and Audit Reactor Advisory Committee and the Safety Subcommittee minutes were reviewed to verify that the Technical Specifications requirements were met.

A quorum was present during the business meetings held in 1979..The committee reviewed audit results, abnormal events and l

corrective actions and irradiations / experiments. The Committee's recommendations were evaluated and acted upon.

No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified in this area.

l

'

-2-

-

-

.-

..

~_

-

.-

..

_.

-

-

_

I a e l

I

4.

Surveillance The surveillance program and records were reviewed to verify con-formance with requirements. The records for selected surveillances indicated that the items had been performed in a timely manner and fulfilled the requirements of the Technical Specifications.

No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified in this area.

5.

Experiements The records and procedures for the experimental and irradiation programs were reviewed to verify that the Technical Specifications

.and procedural requirements were met.

The irradiation and experi-

'

mental programs were found to follow the facilities procedures.

Proposed experiments had been evaluated and accepted for operation in the reactor. The majority of the experiments continue to be experiments and irradiations which have previously been reviewed.

No items of noncompliances or deviations were identified in this area.

6.

Management Interview

<

A management interview was conducted with the licensee representa-tives as denoted in Paragraph I at the conclusion of inspection.

The scope and findings of the inspection were discus;

!

,

l-3-

, _ -

_

.

. -..

-