ML20040C634
| ML20040C634 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | University of Wisconsin |
| Issue date: | 12/23/1981 |
| From: | Kearl B WISCONSIN, UNIV. OF, MADISON, WI |
| To: | Deyoung R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE) |
| References | |
| EA-82-011, EA-82-11, NUDOCS 8201290105 | |
| Download: ML20040C634 (2) | |
Text
--
g g)
~
/
UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON 2
CH ANCELt O R 4)
Bascom Hall e 500 tincoln Drive Madison, Wisconsin 53706 608 262-9946 Office of Inspection and Enforcement RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555 q
p Attention:
Mr. Richard C. DeYoung g g.g'gO Director REGARDING: License No. R-74 2
g g71982P 1 Docket No. 50-156 g#
,pq EA 82-11 n:.g rums:s u E
Statement and Explanation in Response to Notice of Violations as required by 10 C.F.R. 2.201 C) d j
(A Bryant E. Kearl, Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs, University of Wisconsin-4fadison, on behalf of Irving Shain, Chancellor, submits this sworn statement and explanation in response to the Notice of Violation which was transmitted under cover letter dated November 24, 1981. As required under 10 C.F.R. 2.201, the response to the alleged violation includes the following elements:
(a) admission or denial of the alleged item of noncompliance; (b) the reason for the item of noncompliance, if odmitted; (c) the corrective steps which have been taken and results achieved; (d) corrective steps which will be taken to avoid further noncompliance; and (e) the date when full compliance was or will be achieved.
Alleged Violation:
It is alleged that contrary to the requirement of 10 C.F.R. 50.54(K) an operator licensed under 10 C.F.R. part 55 was not present at the controls of the Unf versi+.y's research reactor during operation at approximately 2:35 p.m. on September 1, 1981.
(a) The violation is admitted. Thic violation was first reported to the Cotnmission by telephone on September 2,1981 and confirmed by letter dated September 3, 1981.
(b) The violation was caused by the circumstances which are set forth
- in detail in Inspection Report No. 50-156/181-02. Generally, a licensed operator asked a second licensed operator to relieve him.
The first licensed operator failed to ascertain that the second had signed into the Icg as required by procedures. The second licensed operator subsequently left his post without being relieved by a licensed operator. This occurrence was discovered within about 12 seconds by the Reactor Director, who is a licensed senior operator, and who assumed control until the first operator returned.
This violation occurred even though both operators knew of the procedural requirement and their responsibilities through their participation in a program of continuous operator training.
8201290105 811223 gDRADOCK05000 g 5:
O I
/ '/
t Office of Inspection and Enforcement December :23,1981 Page 2 (c) The following corrective steps were taken:
i (1) The console was staffed by a licensed operator within about 12 seconds of the occurrence.
(2) Both operators were orally reprimanded Lnmediately.
(3) Both operators were given written reprimands which were placed in their personnel files.
(4) All licensed personnel were required' to attend a requalification program lecture on September 3, 1981 on operator responsibilities as defined in the license and procedures.
Strict adherence to procedure was emphasized.
Full compliance was restored as soon as the violation was discovered.
(d) No corrective steps in addition to those specified in par. (3),
i above, are contemplated.
(c) Full compliance was restored as soon as the violation was discovered.
Y Brya Kearl Vice ncellor--Academic Affairs State of Wisconsin County of Dane The foregoing Statement and Explanation in Response to Notice of Violations was subscribed and sworn to before me by Bryant E. Kearl this 23rd day of December, 1981.
s I
Notary Public My commission is permanent.
l l
l 1
l