ML19210D470
| ML19210D470 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | University of Iowa, 05000131, 05000356, University of Missouri-Rolla, 05000112 |
| Issue date: | 08/13/1979 |
| From: | Hind J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | Heishman R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19210D462 | List: |
| References | |
| AITS-HO-7001937, NUDOCS 7911270135 | |
| Download: ML19210D470 (5) | |
Text
Mcu y.j (o,,
y, UNITED STATES g
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ti.'s
'e c REGION 111 O, U 1 8
f 799 ROOSEVELT ROAD E
%,.....,o GLEN ELLYN, ILLINolS 60137 AUG 13 mi9 MEMORANDUM E j
an, Chief, Reactor Operations and Nuclear Support Branch FROM:
J. A. Hind, Chief, Safeguards Branch
SUBJECT:
LICENSE RENEWAL FOR CERTAIN RESEARCH REACTORS (AITS H07001937)
In response to a memorandum dated July 20, 1979 from D. C. Boyd, RPS#3, the following information is provided for the five research reactors identified in the attachment to S. E. Bryan's memo dated June 27, 1979.
Physical Protection Inspections Iowa State University General This f acility is required to be inspected biennially. There were 2 inspections conducted, March 1977 and February 1979.
Inspector hours onsite were 24.5 resulting in total action points of 32.
In the March 1977 inspection there was 1 infraction,1 deficiency and 1 deviation.
In the February 1979 inspection there was 1 infraction (repeat).
Problem Areas The infraction during the February 1979 inspection was a repeat and involved a problem with security officers not recording or making required rounds.
Following the last inspection a member of the Security force met with the Reactor Staff, for discussion of possible solutions.
Manacement Attitudes Attitude is very cooperative and responsive.
The staff is open to all suggestions for operational improvement.
M 1/02 006 t
7911270 /
R. J. Heishman,
AUG 13 1979
, University of Illinois General This facility is required to be inspectad biennially.
During 1975, 1977, and 1979, there were three physical security inspections totaling approrimately 40 hours4.62963e-4 days <br />0.0111 hours <br />6.613757e-5 weeks <br />1.522e-5 months <br /> onsite.
These inspections developed four items of noncompliance (2 infractions and 2 deficiencies) resulting in 24 action points.
Additionally three security weakness were developed.
Problet Areas No sig.ificant problems arens were developed in the licensee's security program or in the enforcement items.
Management Attitudes Licensee management attitude toward security requirements appears to be adequate.
The licensee has taken action to improve his security program based on inspection comments and suggestions.
University of Missourl(Rolla)
General This facility is required to be inspected annually.
Insoections were conducted during Fby 1978 and January 1979.
The total number of onsite hours is 41.
Action points total 12.
Problem Areas May 1978 (Infraction) - Keys were issued by someone other than the authorized of ficial.
January 1979 (Deficiency) - Persons entering facility were not monitored by CCTV as required.
Management Attitudes Adequate. The upper management appears somewhat blase' with respect to security, but the' program runs well.
M i402 007
R. J. Heishman /.05 i 3 197Q Material Control / Accountability Inspections Iowa State University.
This reactor is a 10 kw, light water moderated, graphite reflected thermal reactor operated at short Latervals (of ten less than one hour) and only during normal day operations for training purposes. No noncompliances were found on the most recent inspection of January 10-12, 1978, Inspection Report.No. 50-116/78-01.
However, on the recommendation of the inspection team, the Reactor Supervisor, took action to prepare additional, and separate procedures on SNM control and accounting more specific and detailed than those existing previously.
These were approved by the U iversity Radiaticc. Safety Committee on May 15, 1978. A courtesy copy was n
sent to Region III for our files.
It should be noted that written procedures are not a requirement for a licensee possessing less than one effective kilogram.
Iowa State is in this category.
University of Illinois This university has a TRIGA Mark II reactor with a steady state power rating of 1.5 megawatts and also a separate reactor license, No. R-ll7 for the Low Power Reactor Assembly (LOPRA).
This licensee was cited for (infraction level) not hcring established written material control and accounting procedures as required by 10 CFR Part 70.51(c).
This was as a result of our inspection of September 7-9, 19 77, Report No. 50-151/77-05.
Procedures were issued and a copy sent to Region III on October 6, 1977.
This corrective action will be examined by us in our next inspection.
University of Oklahoma This model AGN-211-102 is primarily used as a training reactor, rated capacity is 15 watts.
The reactor is authorized to possess less than one effective kilogram; therefore formalized written procedures for accountability and material control are not required (10 CFR Part 70.51(c)).
This reactor is in a Group V category for material control and accountability inspections; i.e., our lowest inspection priority.
No items of noncompliance were detected in the most recent inspection on August 21-22, 1978.
Annual physical inventory requirements are being made.
The S::M inventory includes five Fu/Be neutron sources.
The Reactor Supervisor also serves as the University Fealth Physicist which may not be the best arrangenent from an NRC standpoint, but thic is not too unusual for small training recctor utilized main 1.y during normal teaching hours.
9 A 7s-
--4-kp i ui
R. J. Beishnan NJC,i 2 1979,
The facilit-/ level management personnel were ec, perative and almost pleased to s'ee an NRC inspector, someone to bring them up to date on the latest 10 CFR Part 70 Code Requirements and answer their questions on whom to contact for certain reactor questions within NRC or even DOE for other university reactor informatima.
U.S. Veterans Administration Hospital, ~ Omaha,' Nebraska This 18 kw (thermal) TRIGA reactor was inspected on March 15-16, 1976 for Region IV, since this region does not have a Safeguards Material Control and Accounting Section.
One deficiency was found for nc,t submitting the semi-annual Material Status Report within 30 days af ter the end of the period covered by the report.
Another inspe: tion is tantatively scheduled for September,1979.
This research reactor provides irradiation services for radioisotopes to be analyzed by a multichannel GeLi scintillation counter.
Reactor utilization time is quite high for this size reactor, e.g., 20-25,000 kw hrs. have been generated yearly on a one shift, five day week.
One important suggestion made by the NRC inspector to the V. A. Hospital Director at the exit interview was that someone other than the reactor supervisor should be trained in safeguards requirements including related NRC requirriments. This suggestion was verbally agreed to by the Hospital Director and he indicated implementation would be forthcoming.
University of Missouri - Rolla - Training Reactor Facility This is a 200 kw thermal, pool type teaching and research reactor.
Seldom does the reactor run at a continuous full power level, since its main function is not for steady-state power generation.
Reportable amounts of uranium and U-235 depletion have not yet been accumulated, i.e., one gram of either or both.
Cumulative amounts are being kept by the licensee for eventual reporting when a gram quantity is reached.
The last two inspections have resulted in two infractions, one each time, plus one deficiency assessed at the inspection of August 17-18, 1977, Inspection Report No. 50-123/77-04.
Our opinion is that this reactor is rather sloppily run from a material control and accountability function.
We have noted improvement, however particularly af ter items of nonco=pliance were found.
A good part of their accountability shortcomings was due to ignorance rather than evasiveness or negligence.
An?
009 m-
R. J. Heishman _
Written procedures for control of special nuclear material have been generated and a finalized copy sent to Region III on September 27, 1977.
Prior to this a draf t cf these procedures was sent on September 8,1977 to comply with the twenty day reply period.
The Director Nuclear Reactor, should be taking more direct interest in the material control and accounting safeguards requirements, rather than leavin, this to the Reactor Supervisor.
The Dean, School of Mines and Metallurgy, has been cooperative and responsive to our findings and has complied with our request at his level of management responsibility.
If you have any questions related to the information provided, please contact me, hf.c u
c J. A. Hind, Chief Safeguards Branch
.a n ?,_ ni0
.u d
.