ML19347B111
| ML19347B111 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 03002278, University of Missouri-Columbia |
| Issue date: | 08/22/1980 |
| From: | Davis A NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | George M MISSOURI, UNIV. OF, COLUMBIA, MO |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19347B112 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8010010590 | |
| Download: ML19347B111 (2) | |
See also: IR 05000186/1980004
Text
r
sur fc
.
.
/ a .. ~ .
.
o
UNITED STATES
!*
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
. . , ,
"
.;
r
REGION lli
o, '
[
799 ROOSEVELT ROAD
O
%*
o
GLEN ELLYN,ILLINols 6o137
- ....
'AUG 2 2 gag,
Docket No. 50-186
Docket No. 30-2278
The Curators of the University
of Missouri
ATTN:
Dr. Melvin D. George
Vice President for
Academic Affairs
Columbia, MO 65201
Gentlemen:
This refers to the routine inspection conducted by Messrs. R. A. Paul and
P. C. Lovendale of this office on July 15-17, 1980, of activities at the
University of Missouri; Research Reactor Facility authorized by Licenses No.
R-103 and 24-00513-32 and to the discussion of our findings with Dr. Brugger
and members of your staff at the conclusion of the inspection.
The enclosed copy of our inspection report identifies areas examined during the
inspection. Within these areas, the inspection consisted of a selective examina-
tion of procedures and representative records, observations, and interviews with
personnel.
.
In addition to a review of activities under the reactor license, the inspectors
also included a review of selected activities conducted under the broad license
within the Research Reactor Facility. We are con'erned that these activities
may have escaped the purview of both the Campus Radiation Safety Organization
normally concerned with them and the Reactor Health Physics Organization that
services the reactor facility.
The inspection also included a review of the actions described in your letter
dated October 23, 1979 regarding the item of noncompliance found during our
September 11-13, 1979 inspection. We have no further questions on this matter.
Daring this inspection, certain of your activities appeared to be in non-
compliance with hRC requirements, as described in the enclosed Appendix A.
This notice is sent to you pursuant to the provisions of Section 2.201 of
the NRC's " Rules of Practice," Part 2, Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations.
Section 2.201 requires you to submit to this office within twenty days of your
receipt of this notice a written statement or explanation in reply, including
for each item of noncompliance:
(1) corrective action taken and the results
achieved; (2) corrective action to be taken to avoid further noncompliance;
and (3) the date when full compliance will be achieved. Also, in your reply,
please indicate the steps you will take to assign responsibility for health
physics overview of the activities conducted under the broad license at the
Research Reactor Facility.
l
i
80$ 010
g
.
.
The Curators of the University
-2-
of Missouri
.AUG 2 2 sea
Based on discussions with your representatives at the site and subsequent phone
conversations, we understand that an evaluation will be conducted, by September 30,
1980, of the exposure received by a health physi s technician on November 8,
1979, to determine what reasonable dose should se assigned to this individual's
record. We also understand that a detailed procedure will be written and train-
ing completed as required by IE Bulletin 79-19 prior to the next radioactive
waste shipment from your facility, and that your activities associated with the
transfer, packaging and transport of radioactive waste will be included in your
annual health physics audit.
In accordance with Section 2.790 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice," Part 2, Title
10, Code of Federal Regulations, a copy of this letter, the enclosures, and your
response to this letter will be placed in the NRC's Public Document Room, except
as follows.
If the enclosures contain information that you or your contractors
believe to be proprietary, you must apply in writing to this office, within
twenty days of your receipt of this letter, to withhold such information from
public disclosure. The application must include a full statement of the reasons
for which the information is considered proprietary, and should be prepared so
that proprietary information identified in the application is contained in an
enclosure to the application.
We will gladly discuss any questions you have concerning this inspection.
Sincer
,
B
~
A. B. Davis, Chief
Fuel Facility and
, Materials Safety Branch
Enclosures:
1.
Appendix A, Notice
of Violation
2.
IE Inspection Report
No. 50-186/80-04 and
No. 30-2278/80-02
cc w/ encl:
Central Files
Reproduction Unit NRC 20b
i
-
-
-