IR 05000089/1993001

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Partially Withheld Insp Repts 50-089/93-01 & 50-163/93-01 on 930803-06.Non-cited Violations Identified.Major Areas Inspected:Reactor Operations,Review & Audit,Experiments, Transportation Activities & EP Program & Drills
ML20057C478
Person / Time
Site: General Atomics
Issue date: 09/01/1993
From: Pate R, Qualls P
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V)
To:
Shared Package
ML20057C477 List:
References
50-089-93-01, 50-163-93-01, 50-163-93-1, 50-89-93-1, NUDOCS 9309290011
Download: ML20057C478 (5)


Text

~

,

., l3

U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION i

REGION V

i l

Report Nos.:

50-089/93-01 and 50-163/93-01 Docket Nos.:

50-089 and 50-163

~

License Nos.:

R-38 and R-67 Licensee:

GA Technologies Inc.

,

P. O. Box 85608 l

San Diego, California 92138-5608 Facility Name:

TRIGA Mark I and TRIGA Mark F Reactors l

Inspection at:

San Diego, California j

Inspection Date: Au st 3-6, 1993

/93

,

Inspectors:

P. M all Reactor In pector Da'te' Signed

_d c//// M Approved by:

RobeYt"J. Pate', Chief, Saf69dards, Date Signed

.

Emergency Preparedness, and Non-power Reactor Branch Summary:

Routine announced inspection of the General Atomics TRIGA Areas Inspected:

reactor operations, including organization, review and audit, experiments, i

reactor operator requalification training, environmental monitoring program,

!

procedures, radiation protection activities, transportation activities emergency preparedness program and drills, a tour of the facilities and i

discussions of relevant Information Notices and Generic Letters.

Inspection procedures 30703, 40750, and 86740 were used.

In the areas inspected, no violations or deviations were identified.

Results:

)

The licensee conducts a program easily capable of meeting their safety The involvement of the Criticality Safety Committee in facility objectives.

oversight was a significant program strength noted by the inspector.

,

,

l 9309290011 930901 i

gDR ADOCK 05000089 PDR

_

i

.

..

.

.-

..

-

.-.

.

.

-

.

.

k

..

.

q r

' '

i DETAllS

'

i i

1.

PERSONS CONTACTED

-

.

The below listed persons were contacted during the course of the

inspection.

  • K. Asmussen, Director,. Licensing, Safety and Nuclear Compliance D,

A. Baxter, Chairman, TRIGA Criticality Safety Committee

!

W. Hood, Reactor Operations Supervisor, TRIGA Reactors f acility

'

  • R. Rademacher, Vice President for Human Resources

>

  • J. Razvi, Director, Radiation Services, TRIGA Reactors Facility l
  • V. Barbat, Associate Physicist-in-Charge, TRIGA Reactors facility
  • W. Stowe, Chief of Security
  • C. Wisham, Manager, Nuclear Material Accountability

'

  • M. Waczek, Security Captain l
  • H. Kleinsorge, Security Administrator i
  • G. Hein, Facilities Engineering B. Winslow, acting Supervisor Emergency Services L. Quintana, Manager, Health Physics j

Attended exit meeting on August 6, 1993.

2.

Class 11 Research and Test Reactor Operations (40750)

i

,

The inspector reviewed the operations, health physics, emergency The preparedness, and qualification training for the TRIGA reactors.

items reviewed are discussed in the following subparagr:phs.

a.

Oroanization The inspector reviewed the licensee's organization and found that

\\

!

the licensee's organization was consistent with the description of i

the organization described in section 9.1 of their Technical l

Specifications (TS).

!

,

b.

Annual Reports The inspector reviewed the annual reports for 1992. The

!

'

information reported was consistent with the inspector's observations during this inspection.

,

c.

Loas and Records

The inspector reviewed selected operating logs and maintenance records 1992 and 1993. The inspector noted that the records and l

logs were up to date with adequate information included to properly document facility operations. The inspector also noted that problems were clearly identified and documented in the logs and that the maintenance logs left a clear reviewable record of the maintenance accomplished.

i I

l

'

,

-

.

..

-

-

.

.

.

-

-

-

.

.

,. -

i

.

'

r-

,

'

i d.

procedures The inspector verified that the operator responsibilities are clearly defined in licensee procedures. The procedures also The

establish review requirements for procedural changes.

j inspectors reviewed operating procedures and verified that they

were technically adequate and met TS requirements..The inspector verified that the operators were using the current approved

~

procedures.

!

Recualification Trainina f

e.

The inspector reviewed selected licensed operator requalification

Licensee records indicated that all requalification records.

requirements were being tracked and completed as required by their i

approved requalification plan. The inspector observed that some of the biennial physical examination physician certifications, were in the files being maintained by Emergency Services and not in the Licensing Manager's file record. The licensee recognized that the records should be readily available to the Licensing r

Manager.

f.

Surveill ance_

The inspector reviewed selected surveillance records for the No cases of missed

<

Reactor Power Calibration for each reactor.

surveillance requirements were identified. The procedures reviewed appeared to adequately meet TS requirements

.,

Experiments All The inspector reviewed the licensee's experiment records.

experiments had been-properly reviewed and approved by facility management and the Criticality Safety Committee (CSC).

,

b.

Criticality Safety Committee The The inspector reviewed the CSC meeting minutes and reports.

meetings appeared to be at a depth that indicated that the CSC was The meetings were appropriately involved in reactor activities.

,

held as required by TS with a good attendance record by committee The inspector noted that the CSC had a well documented

/

members.

Audits were conducted as required by and comprehensive record.

Adverse findings were tracked and corrected. The inspector TS.

noted that the licensee maintained a wide spectrum of technical knowledge and experience among the CSC members.

,

t i.

Health Physics The inspector reviewed the health physics (Hp) practices at the The radiation areas were clearly marked. Survey facility.

records were reviewed by the inspectors and verified by conducting

e

._

_

_

-. _ _ _

i

~

. f-i

' *

r

'

The surveys were conducted at the required a confirmatory survey.

frequency. The inspector verified that all survey instrumentation

]

observed was in calibration. The inspector' reviewed exposure records for 1992 and verified that no significant personnel i

exposure had occurred. The maximum whole body dose received by a

person, during 1992, at the reactors was 145_ mrem. The inspectors

<

noted that the low exposures received by the facility staff was indicative of an effective A1. ARA program.

The inspector also

noted that the licensee was conducting quarterly HP audits of the i

j TRIGA Facility Hialth Physics programs.

j.

Desian Chanaes The inspectors reviewed selected modifications made to the f

~

facility subsequent to the last inspection. All appeared to have l

Records show i

been properly reviewed, approved, and implemented.

proper CSC and 10 CFR 50.59 review prior to change implementation.

\\

k.

fmeroency Preparedness The inspectors verified through records review that drills were being conducted in accordance with licensee emergency plan The inspector verified through interviews with non-requirements.

i reactor technical staff personnel that they had been trained on the proper response to an emergency. The inspectors reviewed the-1 licensee's emergency plan and associated emergency procedures.

i

)

The licensee implemented Revision 7 to the TRIGA Emergency-Procedures in April 1993. The procedures were resised to be consistent with current NRC guidance. The inspecte reviewed the revised procedures and found that they appear to be a significant enhancement to the licensee's program.

1.

Facility Tour The inspectors toured the reactor facility including the supporting mechanical and electrical areas. All areas were well maintained and facility housekeeping was in order.

Instrumentation was in calibration, emergency response equipment

,

was available and maintained, and no fire or personnel hazards were identified.

Observed Facility Doerations m.

The inspectors observed the Mark F reactor during steady state The Mark I reactor remained shutdown throughout the operations.

inspection. The facility staff appeared to operate the facility in a competent professional manner, proper procedures and checklists were used, and the activities accomplished safely and expeditiously.

No violations or deviations were identifie.y*

.

-

3.

Transportation Activities (86740)

'

Discussions with the licensee's staff and the review of records disclosed that transfers and/or shipments of radioactive materials from the reactor facility are made through the licensee's State of California

radioactive material license. Ho concerns were identified in this area.

,

.

The licensee seemed to be maintaining their previous level of performance in this ' area and their program appeared capable of accomplishing its safety objectives.

No violations or deviations were identified.

'

.

4.

Exit Meetino

.

The The inspectors met with the licensee management on August 6, 1993.

items listed in this report were discust.d at that time. At that time the inspector noted the performance of the CSC to be a significant The licensee did not identify as proprietary any of program strength.

the materials provided to or reviewed by the inspectors during the inspection.