ML033600024

Technical Specifications Required Written Report, Transmitted within Thirty Days Concerning 10CFR50.36 (c)(3)

ML033600024
Person / Time
Site:	05000113
Issue date:	12/11/2003
From:	Williams J Univ of Arizona
To:	Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
Download: ML033600024 (4)

Text

-

Nuclear Reactor Laboratory THE UNIVERSIrY OF John G. Williams, Director Engineering Building (20) e-mail: wiw()engr.arizona.edu P. O. Box 210020 1 voice: (520) 621-9729 Tucson, Arizona 85721-0020 TUCSON ARmZoNA FAX: (520) 621-8096 December 11, 2003 To: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attn: Document Control Desk Mailstop P1-37 1 White Flint North 11555 Rockville Pike Rockville, MD 20852 From: John G. Williams, Director, Nuclear Reactor Laboratory, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ 85721-0020 Re: Technical Specifications required written report, transmitted within thirty days; Facility License R-52, Docket 50-113. This item is concerning 10CFR50.36 (c) (3).

Technical Specifications for Facility License R-52, the University of Arizona, requires in section 6.7 c.4 a written report to the Commission of, "Any observed inadequacies in the implementation of administrative or procedural controls." This report fulfills that requirement in the case of a failure to properly implement Section 2.1 "ADMITTANCE TO UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA RESEARCH REACTOR LABORATORY" Item 1 "Entry Authorization List" of procedure UARR 100.

UARR 100 Section 2.1, Item 1 "Entry Authorization List" states: "Those persons listed on the University of Arizona Research Reactor Entry Authorization List may enter the Reactor Laboratory themselves, and may authorize the entry of other persons (visitors) unless excluded by the Reactor Supervisor or the Reactor Operator on duty. Authorization of entry shall be in person. Such authorization shall be made only if, in the judgement of the person authorizing the entry: a) there is a valid reason for the entry, b) the visitors present no hazard to themselves, the facility, or reactor operations by their presence in the laboratory, and c) an escort or suitable number of escorts, is assigned from the persons designated on the Authorized Entry List for supervising the visitor(s) while in the Reactor Laboratory."

Description of the Occurrence During the span of the days November 17 - 20, 2003, an inspector from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) was present to perform a facility inspection. Craig Bassett is the University of Arizona facility inspector for the NRC. At approximately 1333 on November 18, 2003 Mr. Bassett requested access to the NRL to review plant-operating records. Earlier that same day the Reactor Supervisor, Mike Gavelek, filled out the appropriate paperwork to allow a visitor into the NRL. This paperwork included UARR 166 "Guidelines for Tours and Professional Visits" and form T-1 6 "Visitor Log" referenced on page 6 of UARR 100. Mr. Bassett was also issued a personal radiation detection device.

Per UARR 100, the Reactor Supervisor is required either to escort or provide an escort for the visitor while in the NRL. The Reactor Supervisor left Mr. Bassett unescorted in the NRL for approximately 30 C:\NRL\Reports\occurl 103.doc

minutes. At approximately 1500, after Mr. Bassett had already exited the NRL, the Reactor Supervisor realized that he should not have left the inspector in the NRL unescorted. The Reactor Supervisor immediately attempted to contact the Reactor Director to inform him of the situation. At approximately 1630 the Reactor Supervisor informed the Reactor Director of the situation and the NRC Inspector was subsequently informed of the inadequacy of administrative or procedural controls at 1715 on the same day.

Cause of the Occurrence The failure to comply with UARR 100 Section 2.1 on November 18, 2003 occurred because of a poor thought process on the part of the Reactor Supervisor. His trust, personal knowledge and taking into account the security clearance of the inspector distracted him from following UARR 100 to the letter. It was the Reactor Supervisor who subsequently realized his mistake, and reported it.

Possible Consequences The obvious possible consequences are the security implications of an unescorted visitor, ranging from destruction of property to theft of material. In this instance, however, the visitor was personally known to licensee personel, was known to be on official business, and was known to be trustworthy. Therefore no negative outcome could be expected.

Remedial Actions On the morning of November 19, 2003, the Reactor Director instructed the Reactor Supervisor to perform a complete check of the facility following the incident of the unescorted visitor. The check was completed prior to operations. There was no damaged or missing equipment noted and no abnormalities found in the NRL. This was conveyed in a memo from the Reactor Supervisor, attached to this document.

The performance of this check in no way infers that the University of Arizona NRL Staff believes that Mr. Bassett would do anything to cause harm or damage to the NRL or its staff. It was done to demonstrate appropriate remedial action in response to a visitor being left unescorted.

The Reactor Director conducted an in depth discussion with the Reactor Supervisor regarding UARR 100 and its application with regard to visitors. This has corrected any deficiency that the Reactor Supervisor may have had in regards to admitting visitors in to the NRL.

The name of Mr. Bassett, being the designated NRC inspector for this facility, has been added to the NRL "Standing Authorized Entry List". In the future he can be left unescorted in the facility, if there is a need to do so.

I believe that these actions will prevent a recurrence of any similar oversight of the requirements of UARR 100.

This event was opened and closed as a Non Cited Violation by the facility inspector designated 50-113/2003-201-01 J.,fT Williams, Director, Nuclear Reactor Laboratory C:ANRL\Reports\occurl 103.doc

copies to:

Events Assessment, Generic Communications and Non-Power Reactors Branch Division of Regulatory Improvement Programs Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation One White Flint North 11555 Rockville Pike Rockville, MD 20852-2738 The V.P. for Research, University of Arizona Richard C. Powell The Director of the Arizona Research Laboratories Michael A. Cusanovich Members of the Reactor Committee The Reactor Supervisor Michael L. Gavelek C:\NRL\Reportskoccurl 103.doc

Nuclear Reactor Laboratory E UNIVERSITY OF John G. Williams, Director Engineering Building (20) e-mail: jgwlengr.arizona.edu P. 0. Box 210020 Tucson, Arizona 85721-0020 ARIZONA voice: (520) 621-9729 FAX: (520) 621-8096 TUCSON AZONA November 19, 2003 To: John G. Williams, Director, Nuclear Reactor Laboratory, From: Michael Gavelek Reactor Supervisor Re: Memo documenting complete check of NRL following unescorted visitor incident.

This memo is to inform you that I completed a thorough check of the NRL following the unescorted visitor incident of November 18, 2003.

A complete inventory of the fuel was done and none was found to be missing or disturbed. All door locks and padlocks were found to be undisturbed. All instrumentation was found to be untouched.

This check was completed prior to any operations.

C:NRL\Reports\occurl 103memo.doc