IR 05000288/2005201

Reed College Reactor Facility - Notice of Violation Inspection Report No. 0500288-05-201

ML061920483
Person / Time
Site:	Reed College
Issue date:	09/12/2006
From:	Ho Nieh NRC/NRR/ADRA/DPR
To:	Frantz S Reed College
Hughes D, NRR/DPR/PRT, 301-415-1631
References
EA-06-156 IR-05-201
Download: ML061920483 (4)

Text

September 12, 2006EA-06-156Mr. Stephen Frantz, DirectorReed College Reactor Reed College 3203 S.E. Woodstock Boulevard Portland, OR 97202-8199SUBJECT:REED COLLEGE REACTOR FACILITY- NOTICE OF VIOLATION INSPECTION REPORT NO. 50-288/2005-201

Dear Mr. Frantz:

This refers to the inspection and investigation conducted on May 31 thru June 2, 2005, at theReed College Reactor facility. The purpose of the inspection was to follow-up on the eventsthat occurred at your facility on May 10 and 11, 2005, involving problems with your data loggingand rod control systems. The inspection report was issued on J une 23, 2005. Based on theresults of this inspection, unresolved items (URIs) were identified involving a potential violation resulting from an unauthorized facility modification by an employee who engaged in deliberatemisconduct. Pursuant to the URIs, the Office of Investigations (OI) performed an investigation. In a telephone conversation on August 23, 2006, Mr. Johnny Eads, of my staff, informed you,that the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) was considering a Severity Level IVNotice of Violation (NOV) for a violation involving deliberate misconduct by an employee.

Mr. Eads also informed you that we had sufficient information regarding the apparent violation and your corrective actions to make this enforcement decision. This violation is cited in the enclosed NOV and the circumstances surrounding it are described in detail in the subject inspection report. Although this unauthorized facility modification did not adversely impact reactor safety nor wasthe health and safety of the public affected because the facility's startup checklist detected amalfunction in the rod control system and the problem was corrected before operation wasallowed, conduct of this nature by a licensee employee raises serious doubt as to whether the individual can be relied upon to comply with NRC requirements.Further, although the NRC recognizes that your established procedures detected a failure andfound and corrected the problem, the NRC holds the facility licensee responsible for the actionsof its employees. To emphasize the importance that the NRC places on the responsibility of thelicensee, the NRC has issued the enclosed NOV. However, by letter dated June 7, 2005, you have provided corrective actions to provide addedassurance that employees are more closely monitored. Those actions include enhancements to background checks, monitoring, supervisory oversight, and hours of activities. Particularlyimportant was your initiative to regularly check individuals with unescorted access for changes in status with other departments within the college. Your June 7, 2005, letter indicated that-2-these actions would be complete before the beginning of the academic year onAugust 29, 2005. These actions, as documented in your August 23, 2006 letter, have been considered in NRC's evaluation of the violation. Specifically, NRC considers your proposedcorrective actions to be acceptable and no further response to the NOV is needed. Again, your cooperation, timely identification, and correction of the issue was recognized and the NRC willfollow up in future inspections.In accordance with Section 2.390, "Public inspections, exemptions, requests for withholding," ofTitle 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations, a copy of this letter and its enclosure will be madeavailable for public inspection in the NRC Public Document Room and from the NRC'sAgencywide Documents Access and Management System accessible from the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To the extent possible, your response, if any,should not include any personal privacy, proprietary, or safeguards information so that it can be made available to the Public without redaction. The NRC also includes significant enforcementactions on its Web site at www.nrc.gov; select What We Do , Enforcement , then SignificantEnforcement Actions

.

Sincerely,

/RA by John Lubinski for/

Ho K. Nieh, Acting Director Division of Policy and Rulemaking Office of Nuclear Reactor RegulationDocket No. 50-288License No. R-112 Enclosure: NOV-3-these actions would be complete before the beginning of the academic year onAugust 29, 2005. These actions, as documented in your August 23, 2006 letter, have been considered in NRC's evaluation of the violation. Specifically, NRC considers your proposedcorrective actions to be acceptable and no further response to the NOV is needed. Again, your cooperation, timely identification, and correction of the issue was recognized and the NRC willfollow up in future inspections.In accordance with Section 2.390, "Public inspections, exemptions, requests for withholding," ofTitle 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations, a copy of this letter and its enclosure will be madeavailable for public inspection in the NRC Public Document Room and from the NRC'sAgencywide Documents Access and Management System accessible from the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To the extent possible, your response, if any,should not include any personal privacy, proprietary, or safeguards information so that it can be made available to the Public without redaction. The NRC also includes significant enforcementactions on its Web site at www.nrc.gov; select What We Do , Enforcement , then SignificantEnforcement Actions

.

Sincerely,

/RA by John Lubinski for/

Ho K. Nieh, Acting Director Division of Policy and Rulemaking Office of Nuclear Reactor RegulationDocket No. 50-288License No. R-112 Enclosure: NOV DISTRIBUTION

PUBLICSECYOCA LReyesWKane MJohnsonJLuehmanDSolorioDStarkeyLChandler BJonesMBatyJDyer BMallettDHolody CEvansKO'BrienKFuller RPascarelliHNieh BThomasJEadsCBassettDHughesMMendonca AAdamsPIsaacOEWEBOEMAILOAC3ADAMS ACCESSION NO. ML061920483*see previous concurrence**concurred via emailOFFICEPRTA:LAPRTA:BCOEDPR:(A)DNAMEMMendonca for DBaxley*JEads:tls*JLuehman**Jlubinski forHNieh:tls*DATE8/17/068/17/068/21/068/24/06OFFICIAL RECORD COPY NOTICE OF VIOLATIONReed CollegeDocket No.: 50-288Reed College Reactor License No.: R-112 EA-06-156During an NRC inspection conducted on May 31 thru June 2, 2005, one violation of NRCrequirements was identified. In accordance with the NRC Enforcement Policy, the violation islisted below:A.10 CFR 50.59 requires that a licensee may make changes in the facility wit houtobtaining a license amendment pursuant to 10 CFR 50.90 only if a change to the TS incorporated in the license is not required, and the change does not meet any of thecriteria in paragraph (c)(2). Therefore, any change, whether or not an amendment is required, requires that a review pursuant to 10 CFR 50.59 be done prior to making the change. Contrary to the above, on May 10, 2005, a jumper that had been installed on the K2relay in the rod control circuitry on April 15, 1999, as documented in the MaintenanceLog and "As-Built" instrumentation circuitry, was removed and was not evaluated under 10 CFR 50.59.This is a Severity Level IV Violation (Supplement I).The NRC has concluded that information regarding the reason for the violation, the planned andtaken corrective actions to correct the violation and prevent recurrence, and the date when full compliance will be achieved was adequately addressed in your letter dated June 7, 2005. However, you are required to submit a written statement or explanation pursuant to 10 CFR 2.201, "Notice of Violation," if the description therein does not accurately reflect yourcorrective actions or your position. In that case, or if you choose to respond, clearly mark your response as a "Reply to a Notice of Violation," include the EA number, and send it to the U.S.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ATTN: Document Control Desk, Washington, DC 20555-0001 within 30 days of the date of the letter transmitting this Notice of Violation (NOV).If you contest this enforcement action, you should also provide a copy of your response, withthe basis for your denial, to the Director, Office of Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001.If you choose to respond, your response will be made available electronically for publicinspection in the NRC Public Document Room and from the NRC's Agencywide DocumentsAccess and Management System accessible from the NRC Web site athttp://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. Therefore, to the extent possible, your responseshould not include any personal privacy, proprietary, or safeguards information so that it can be made available to the Public without redaction.In accordance with 10 CFR 19.11, "Posting of notices to workers," you may be required to postthis NOV within two working days of receipt.Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 12 th day of September 2006.