ML19269D388

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Ack Receipt of Informing NRC of Steps Taken to Correct Violations Noted in IE Insp Rept 50-124/79-02
ML19269D388
Person / Time
Site: 05000124
Issue date: 05/10/1979
From: James O'Reilly
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
To: Parkinson T
VIRGINIA POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE & STATE UNIV., BLACKSB
Shared Package
ML19269D389 List:
References
NUDOCS 7906020174
Download: ML19269D388 (2)


See also: IR 05000124/1979002

Text

s...-.s

-

- . - - . . . . - . - . - . . , . . . . . .

.

~

"

'

.-

.... . . . . . . .

.

. - . . . - - . . . .

- -

-.-.

-

k*R8 Coq

-

UNITED STATES

4

jo

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

g

R EGIoN 11

o

g.,.,

101 M ARIETT A sTRE ET.N.W.

5

..g

  • k *""' /

ATL ANTA, GE oRGIA 30303

.

s ....+

M M i a 1979

.

In Reply Refer To:

RII:CJ

50-124/79-02

'

Virginia Polytechnic Institute

and State University

Attn: Dr. T. F. Parkinson, Director

Nuclear Laboratory

'

Blacksburg, Virginia 24060

Gentlemen:

This refers to your letter of April 18, 1979, which responded to the

Notice of Violation sent to you with our letter of March 23, 1979,

concerning activities that were in noncompliance with Operating License

No. R-62.

We

Concerning your response to Item B, we have no further questions.

'

will examine your corrective actions during subsequent inspections.

With regard to Item A.2 of your letter which states that a list of

qualified reactor operators was posted in the reactor console room, no

such list was observed by the inspectors during the inspection and your

We

management representative stated that the requirement was not met.

will review Item A.2 during a subsequent inspection. Since this is but

-

one of three examples cited in paragraph A of"our Notice of Violation,

of failure to properly document your reactor operator requalification

program, this does not change our finding.

,

Concerning Item C, we have reevaluated our position and determined that

no additional information was provided which would change our findings.

Specifically, the inspector observed the fission product monitor to be

reading 80 mr/hr during normal operation of the reactor at 100 ht,

-

which requires by Technical Specifications that the instrument trip

point be set at or less than 800 mr/hr. Accordingly, please submit an

additional written response to this office, within ten (10) days of your

receipt of this letter, which provides the information required by

.

10 CFR 2.201.

In your letter you committed to a completion date of August 30, 1979 to

'

complete the required procedure re, visions. This completion date is

acceptable.

It is our understanding that any interim procedures you

-

, . f*cplement are being reviewed and approved by the Radiation Safety Committee

,

s

'

in.'pecordance with Technical Specification 8.3.

l

4

2257 261

1906020174

.

.

.

..

.

.

..

..

.. _..

..

.

.

.

Virginia 41ytechnic Institute

-2-

MAY 101979

.

,,

.

Should you have any questions concerning this letter, we would be happy

to meet with you and discuss the matter further.

Sincerely,

-

ws.$.O*

James P. O'Reilly

irector

-

-

.

2257'262

.

<

,8

', ,/

,.

, . .i ;

. ,

. . .

.

I

li

i

'

.

,

,, ., .

p .. -

. ,

aumme = =