ML20028B865

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Forwards IE Insp Rept 50-112/82-01 on 820913-15 & Notice of Violation
ML20028B865
Person / Time
Site: 05000112
Issue date: 11/11/1982
From: Madsen G
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV)
To: Egle D
OKLAHOMA, UNIV. OF, NORMAN, OK
Shared Package
ML20028B866 List:
References
NUDOCS 8212070126
Download: ML20028B865 (3)


See also: IR 05000112/1982001

Text

--

.-

..

-

.

.

l

.

Nov 111992

Docket:

50-112/82-01

i

The University of Oklahoma

ATTN:

Dr. Davis Egle, Director

School of Aerospace, Mechanical

and Nuclear Engineering

1000 Asp Avenue

Norman, Oklahoma 73019

Gentlemen:

This refers to the inspection conducted by Messrs. W. S. Schum, R. T. Redano,

and M. E. Murphy of our staff during the period September 13-15, 1982, of

,

activities authorized by NRC Operating License R-53.

The results of this inspection indicate the need for tdditional improvements

in the management of your reactor program.

NRC concerns relating to these

areas were discussed between University of Oklahoma representatives and

Messrs. J. E. Gagliardo and R. T. Redano of our staff at an Enforcement

Conference held at the University of Oklahoma on October 7,1982.

Principal areas examined during the inspection and our findings are discussed

in the enclosed inspection report. Within these areas, the inspection

consisted of selective examination of procedures, drawings, representative

records, interviews with personnel, and observations by the NRC inspectors.

During this inspection, it was found that certain of your activities were in

violation of NRC requirements.

Consequently, you are required to respond to

these violations, in writing, in accordance with the provisions of Section 2.201

of the NRC's " Rules of Practice," Part 2, Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations.

Your response should be based on the specifics contained in the Notice of

Violation attached to this letter.

In addition, we are concerned about the implementation of your program for

management control of your licensed activities that permitted these violations

to occur.

Your repeated failure to fully implement your approved operator

requalification program as required by 10 CFR 50.54 becomes more significant

when one considers that it was first identified as an NRC concern during the

1978 inspection of your facility and again identified as a violation of NRC

,

regulations during the 1981 inspection of your facility by members of our

i

RPS-B [

RPS-B

RPS-A

RPB1

RPS-

RP82,'

DRRP&EP

RA

[/WSchum/dsm

WCrossman

TWes3erman GMadsen WJoh

n

WSei lek

JGagli'ardo

JC

ins

i 11/ /82

11/f/82

11/4/82

11/p/8211/S82

11/g/82

11/f/82

11/ /82

r

8212070126 8211*1

~

PDR ADOCK 05000

1

0

'

. .

, . , - - - -

-

.

-

..

-

,

,.

_

.

.

NOV 121992

The University of Oklahoma

2

staff. The September 13-15, 1982, inspection revealed that the operator

requalification program has not been conducted in accordance with

10 CFR 50.54, nor your facility requalification procedure.

This deficiency

was addressed several times in your audit reports and RSC meetings, yet you

failed to take any corrective action.

Your failure to correct an ongoing

program deficiency which constitutes a repetitive violation evidences a lack

of management controls.

Also, the significance of failure to maintain records

of test procedures or test results dealing with the design change performed on

the safety rod drive motor sprocket as required by 10 CFR 50.59(b) is enhanced

by the fact that a violation was issued to you in 1981 for failure to conduct

a safety review of this design change as required by 10 CFR 50.59(b).

Your

failure to implement a design change program which fully complies with regulatory

requirements mainfests a lack of management controls and awareness.

Lack of

compliance with NRC regulations in areas of repetitive violations and improper

or untimely corrective actions identify a lack of management control and may

constitute the need for escalated enforcement action if not properly corrected.

Consequently, in your reply you should describe, in particular, those actions

taken or planned to improve the effectiveness of your management control of

the requirements of your license.

In accordance with 10 CFR 2.790 of the Commission's regulations, a copy of

this letter and the enclosed inspection report will be placed in the NRC's

Public Document Room.

If this report contains any information that you

believe to be exempt from disclosure under 10 CFR 9.5(a)(4), it is necessary

that you (a) notify this office by telephone within 10 days from the date of

this letter of your intention to file a request for withholding; and

(b) submit within 25 days from the date of this letter a written application

to this office to withhold such information.

If your receipt of this letter

has been delayed such that less than 7 days are available for your review,

please notify this office promptly so that a new due date may be established.

Consistent with Section 2.790(b)(1), any such info"mation which identifies the

document or part sought to be withheld, and which contains a full statement of

the reasons on the basis which it is claimed that the information should be

withheld from public disclosure.

This section further requires the statement

to address with specificity the considerations listed in 10 CFR 2.790(b)(4).

The information sought to be withheld shall be incorporated as far as possible

into a separate part of the affidavit.

If we do not hear from you in this

regard within the specified periods noted above, the report will be placed in

the Public Documert Room.

The response directed by this letter and the accompanying Notice is not

subject to the clearance procedures of the Office of Management and Budget as

required by the Paperwork Reduction Action of 1980, PL 96-511.

.

.

.

The University of Oklahoma

3

NOV 11 }ggg

Should you have any questions concerning this inspection, we will be pleased

to discuss them with you.

Sincerely,

Orlainal Signod bYi

G. E. MADSEN5

G. L. Madsen, Chief

Reactor Project Branch 1

Enclosures:

1. Appendix A - Notice of Violation

2. Appendix B - NRC Inspection Report 50-112/82-01

cc w/encls:

The University of Oklahoma

ATTN:

Dr. E. H. Klehr, Chairman

Reactor Safety Committee

1000 Asp Avenue

Norman, Oklahoma 73019

The University of Oklahoma

ATTN:

Dr. Charles W. Terrell, Professor

Nticlear Engineering School of

Aerospace, Mechanical and Nuclear

Engineering

1000 Asp Avenue

Norman, Okiahoms 73019

bec to DMB (IE01)

bec distrib. by RIV:

BC

PM

RPB2

Resident Inspector

'

'

AE0D

ELD

TPB

Section Chief

IE FILE

NRR/DHFS/0LB

MIS SYSTEM

W. Schum

NRR/DSI/RAB

RES

RIV File

R. Redano

LPDR

NRC PDR

RA

M. Murphy

NSIC

NTIS

D. Hunnicutt

C. Wisner

.

.tg 6


m-

y

-

r

--n--,

a-

w,