IR 05000006/1978001
| ML19274C781 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Battelle Memorial Institute, 07000008, 07000006 |
| Issue date: | 10/10/1978 |
| From: | Miller D NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19274C778 | List: |
| References | |
| 30-05728-78-03, 30-5728-78-3, 50-006-78-01, 70-0008-78-04, 70-8-78-4, NUDOCS 7811170319 | |
| Download: ML19274C781 (7) | |
Text
.
.
.
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
REGION III
Report No. 70-008/78-04; 30-5728/78-03; 50-006/78-01 Docket No.70-008; 30-5728;50-006 License No. SNM-7; 34-06854-05; R-4 Licensee:
Battelle Columbus Laboratories 505 King Avenue Columbus, OH 43201 Facility name: Columbus Laboratories Inspection at: Columbus Laboratories, Columbus, OH West Jefferson Nuclear Facility, West Jefferson, OH Inspection conducted: September 11-15, 1978 b
YLur Inspector: hb.E.Miiler
/C /4 7M
,
lk.k b ~ h Approved by: W.L.FiseY, Chief
/O[9[^77 Fuel Facility Projects and Radiation Support Section Inspection Summary Areas Inspected: Routine unannounced inspection of:
radiation protection program, including qualifications, audits, training, procedures, exposure control, posting-labeling controls, surveys, notifications, and reports; radicactive waste management, including liquid effluents, airborne effluents, effluent records and reports, procedures for controlling effluents; and technical specification requirements for the retired research reactor facility. The inspection involved 39 inspector-hours onsite by one NRC inspector.
Results: No items of noncompliance or devi.tions were identified.
7811170319'
.
.
.
.
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted
- K. C. Brog, Manager, Physics, Electronics, and Nuclerr Technology Departrent
- H. L. Toy, Licensing Coordinator
- W. Madia, Manager, West Jefferson Nuclear Facility
- D. A. McKown, Radiological Safety Officer
- G. E. Kirsch, Supervisor, Health Physics Services
- J. F. Dettorre, Site Manager, West Jefferson Operations J. Wissinger, Health Physics Technician, Plutonium Laboratory E. R. Swindall, Health Physics Technician, Hot Cell Laboratory R. D. Flint, Supervisor, Instrument Laboratory R. Evans, Supervisor, Environmental Health Physics The inspector also contacted several health physics and electronics technicians during the course of the inspection.
- Denotes those present at the exit interview.
2.
General This inspection, which began at 10:30 a.m. on September 11, 1978, was conducted to examine the radiation protection and radwaste aspects of routine laboratory operations, and the technical speci-fication requirements for the retired research reactor facility.
3.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings (Closed) Infraction (70-008/77-05; 30-5728/77-02):
Concerning an indication of elevated average radiation level at one monitored station at the unrestricted area boundary.
(Paragraph 16)
(Closed) Commitment (70-008/78-02; 30-5728/78-01):
Concerning the reorganization of fragmented respiratory protection procedures into formal, comprr.hensive procedures.
(Paragraph 12)
(Closed) Co witment (70-008/78-02; 30-5728/78-01):
Concerning the feasibility of uair.g bor filter testing equipment to quantitatively fit-test respiratory protection equipment.
The licensee has deter-mined that such use is feasible, and intends to establish practi-cality and need.
(0 pen) Infraction (70-008/78-03; 30-5728/78-02):
Concerning missed weekly smear surveys in the Hot Cell Laboratory.
This matter will be inspected during a subsequent inspection.
-2-
.
.
.
.
4.
Health Physics Training Since the last health physics inspection, E. Swindall attended a one-week Basic Radiation Protection course and the Annual Air Cleaning Conference at Harvard, and J. Woodward attended a LASL Aerosol Air Sampling Course.
Several in-house training sessions have been conducted including a ten-week computer programming course attended by R. Evans.
The licensee has ordered a commercially available health physics technician training course which includes tape presentations, text material, and sample tests.
The licensee intends to provide this training for all health physics technicians.
5.
Radiation Protection Procedures The inspector reviewed the following recently written procedures:
PU-NS-200 Radiological Safety Training, Plutonium Laboratory Initial Indoctrination PU-NS-21 Lapel Air Monitoring System for Radioactive Particulates PU-NS-100 Measuring Air Flow Rate of the Sairsat Lapel Sampler PU-NS-21.1 Radiological Counting of Sairsat Lapel Air Sample Filters PU-NS-22 Procedures for Intentional Breachments of Plutonium-Containing Gloveboxes or Enclosures These procedures appear to be compatible with regulatory requirements.
No problems were identified.
6.
Internal Audits Radiation Saf ety Committee a.
The inspector reviewed the following Radiation Safety Committee case files:
RSC-3-20 Byproduct waste area for Department 520, May 15, 1978.
RSC-3-21 Review of use of 32-curie Co-60 sealed source, May 12, 1978.
-3-
-
.
.
.
RSC-3-22 Request for plutonium waste storage at JN-3, May 8, 1978.
RSC-3-23 Proposed construction it
'.ht Cell Laboratory, May 22, 1978.
The inspector noted that the committee review includes license and regulation compliance and ALARA considerations.
b.
Radiation Safety Officer (RS0)
The inspector reviewed the report of a health physics audit conducted by the RSO during the calendar quarter ending June 30, 1978. Recommendations made by the RSO concerned the need for increased rate of procedure development, additional radiation protection training, and for improved waste handling and storage methods in the Hot Cell Laboratory.
Response to these recommendations will be reviewed during a subsequent inspection. No items of noncompliance were identified by the RSO.
7.
Plutonium Laboratory The inspector reviewed records of routine smear surveys, lapel air samples, facility air samples, and stack samples collected and analyzed during the period April through August 1978.
Frequency of sampling appears to be adequate.
The inspector reviewed evaluations of two events where increased activity was detected by lapel samplers during normal laboratory operations. These evaluations include the determination of isetope and solubility to establish MPC-hour exposure, and bioassays to verify the determinations. No exposures in excess of 10 CFR 20.103 limits were indicated. No problems were identified.
8.
Hot Cell Laboratory The inspector toured the facility and visually observed facilities and equipment, postings, labeling, and access controls.
The inspector discussed with licensee representatives the apparent casual approach used in the use of protective clothing. Most areas outside of the hot cells are not significantly contaminated and would not require the use of such clothing.
The licensee has chosen to use some protective clothing in these areas as a precautionary measure without establishing clearly defined boundaries. The pre-dictable result is that protective clothing is worn and placed-4-
.
.
,
outside of these areas in clean areas such as offices. The inspector found no evidence of significant contamination spread by this use of pro ective clothing. No other problems were identified.
9.
Whole Body Counting On April 12 and 13, 1978, a contractor performed 34 whole body counts for mixed fission, corrosion, and activation products on 34 licensee employees. No activity above one percent of MPBB was detected.
No problems were identified.
10.
Bioassays The inspector reviewed the results of urinalyses conducted during the first six months of 1978. Generally, employees are routinely sampled at three-month intervals and the samples analyzed for isotopes present in their work environment.
No significant activ-ity was detected. No problems were noted.
11.
Film Badges The inspector reviewed film badge and TLD results for the first two calendar quarters of 1978.
The frequency of exchange is every two weeks or monthly, depending on the work area.
The highest whole body quarterly dose noted was 1390 millirems.
Forms NRC-4 were maintained for those individuals who received greater than 1250 millirems during a calendar quarter.
No exposures exceeding 10 CFR 20 limits were identified.
No problems were identified.
12.
Respiratory Protection Program The licensee's respiratory protection program remains as previously described (70-008/78-02; 30-5728/78-01), except for operational procedures. The licensee has assimilated the previously fragmented information into formal comprehensive procedures.
The inspector reviewed these new procedures, listed below, and found that the requirements for written procedures listed in Regulatory Guide 8.15 apparently are met.
No problems were identified.
NS-NS-3 Respiratory Protection Program NS-NS-3.1 Respiratory Protection Program Policy Statement 13.
Liquid Effluents The inspector reviewed the methods of sampling, sample analysis, and quantification for liquids released to a stream from West Jefferson Nuclear Facility and to the sanitary sewer from the-5-
e
.
.
.
King Avenue site. Records for the period January through July 1978 were reviewed.
No releases in excess of 10 CFR 20 limits were iden-tified. No significant problems were noted.
14.
Airborne Ef fluents The inspector reviewed the methods of sampling, sample analysis, and quantification of airborne effluents.
Noble gas effluents from the llot Cell Laboratory are generally quantified by calculation of expected releases from fuel sample punctures. Noble gas releases are small compared witn permissible concentrations.
Particulates and halogens are quantified by gamma isotopic ane. lysis of particulate filters and charcoal adsorbers which continuously sample effluent pathways. The inspector reviewed records of airborne effluent sample analy:is and quantification for the period January through July 1978.
No releases in excess of 10 CFR 20 limits were identified. No significant problems were noted.
15.
Instruments and Equipment Portable survey, area monitor, and effluent monitor instrument cali-brations and tests were not reviewed during this inspection.
These matters will be reviewed during a subsequent inspection.
16.
Direct Radiation Environmental Monitoring The licensee maintains twenty-five TLD environmental monitoring packets attached to and spaced around the facility unrestricted area fence. The packets are supplied and the TLDs are read-out by a contractor.
As a result of tl.e one high reading previously reported and cited (70-008/77-05; 30-5728/77-02), the licensee is temporarily per-forming additional TLD surveillance in the suspect area using licensee owned, operated, and calibrated equipment.
The inspector reviewed this surveillance program, and the results obtained during the period October 1977 thronoh August 1978. The highest readings indic ie a maximum =uarage radiation level of 25 millirems per seven consecutive days at the unrestricted area boundary near the hot cell. Changes in radiation levels attributable to work being performed in the hot cell area were evident.
Based on the surveil-lance results, the licensee has concluded that the cited high reading was erroneous. The inspector noted no evidence to dispute this conclusion.
-6-
a
.
.
a 17.
Retired Research Reactor Facility Documentation for the period July 1977 through June 1978 indi-a.
cating compliance with the following technical specification requirements were reviewed by the inspector. No significant problems were identified.
(1) Gross activity of water discharged from the facility within limits stated in Technical Specification 3.2.
(2) Calibration and operability checks of water monitor required by Technical Specification 4.2.
(3) Facility radiation surveys required by Technical Speci-fication 4.5.a.
(4) Environmental radiation surveys required by Technical Specification 4.5.b.
(5) Physical barriers inspections required by Technical Specification 4.5.c.
b.
The inspector toured the facility and visually observed postings, physical barriers, and waste storage room monitoring instrumen-tation. No problems were identified.
c.
The current Retired Facility Site Representative is Mr. J. F. Dettorre.
18.
Exit Interview The inspector met with licensee representatives (denoted in Para-graph 1) at the conclusion of the inspection on Septembo. 15, 1978.
The following matters were discussed:
a.
The purpose and scope of the inspection.
b.
Previous items of noncompliance and commitments.
(Paragraph 3)
c.
The inspector stated that he had reviewed the correspondence between BCL, DOE, and NRC concerning the Pulab decontamination.
The inspector acknowledged that the decontamination effort will be done under the purview of DOE.
-7-