IR 05000113/1999201
| ML20195F600 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 05000113 |
| Issue date: | 06/09/1999 |
| From: | NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20195F595 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-113-99-201, NUDOCS 9906150040 | |
| Download: ML20195F600 (13) | |
Text
-
..'
.
.
.
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION i
Docket No:
50-113
License No:
R-52
'
Report No:
50-113/99-201 Licensee:
University of Arizona i
Facility:
Nuclear Reactor Laboratory Location:
Engineering Building (202)
Tucson, Arizona Dates:
May 4 - 7,1999 Inspector:
Stephen W. Holmes, Reactor inspector i
!
Approved by:
Ledyard B. Marsh, Chief l
Events Assessment, Generic Communications and Non-Power Reactors Branch Division of Regulatory improvement Programs Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
!
i l
f i
!
!
I N 990609 i
PDR ADOCK 05000113 G
'
I
g
.
p.-
I-
- .
<
l'
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY f
'This routine, announced inspection consisted of the review of selected conditions and records since the las'. inspection, verification of corrective actions previously committed to l
by the licensee, and related discussions with licensee personnel. The inspection was conducted following the guidance of NRC Inspection Manual.
9perations The research reactor operations staffing satisfied TS requirements.
Organizational and administrative controls remain consistent with TS and license requirements and commitments.
The material control and accountability program satisfied regulatory requirements.
e Special nuclear material (SNM) possession and use limits were satisfied.
Plant Support The emergency pl' n was being effcctively implemented. Facilities, equipment, and
a resources were as described by the emergency plan. Drills and training were acceptably being conducted, and procedures and documentation were as required by the emergency plan.
- Radiological postings satisfied regulatory requirements.
-e ~
Gaseous effluent monitoring and releases satisfied regulatory requirements.
Surveys were performed and documented as required by 10 CFR Part 20, TS, and e
licensee requirements The dosimetry program was conducted in accordance with 10 CFR 20.1501,10 CFR e
20.1502, and licensee procedures. Doses were in conformance with licensee and 10 CFR Part 20 limits, e.
RP&C equipment was being maintained according to industry and equipment manufacturer standards. Calibrations satisfied TS requirements.
e The radiation protection program (RPP) satisfied the requirements of 10 CFR 20.1101 and was reviewed annually as required. Oversight and review were provided by the reactor and university staffs.
- Health physics (HP) procedures met technical specifications (TS).
l
,
{, :
.,
,..
-
., -
,
j'
2-
<
.,
e ~
Radiation' worker training met license requirements, conformed to licensee-procedures, and satisfied 10 CFR 19.12 for instruction to workers.
.
l:
HP staffing met regulatory requirements and licensee commitments.
.
e-The reactor committee (RC) carried out its safety duties and provided HP oversight as obligated by the license,'TS, and administrative controls.
e
. Radioactive material was generally transferred and disposed of in accordance with licensee ' procedures, TS,10 CFR Part 49, and 10 CFR Part 20 requirements.
.
e The November 25,1998, letter reporting an observed inadequacy in the-implementation of administrative or procedural controls satisfied TS section
' 6.7.c.4.a. requirements. Licensee actions regarding SNM shipping and the applicable UARR procedure were acceptable.
- -
The licensee's emergency plan was effectively carried out as required. Emergency-preparedness (EP) drius and training were acceptably being conducted.
\\
l
J
,
P Is'
l.
.
l-
1
%n
]
.
+-
.-
-.
.
Report Details
$
Egmmary of Plant Status Reactor operations were continuing to support research, reactor operator training, educational courses, and to performing preventive maintenance and operational
'
surveillances required by the TS. No safety concerns were noted.
l 1.
Operations
Conduct of Operations 01.1 Reactor Staffino a.
Jnspection Scope (Insoection Procedure 69001)
i The inspector reviewed the Nuclear Reactor Laboratory (NRL) staff positions, line of authority, and interviewed staff.
,
b,
.Qbservations and Findinsg
'
Licensed staff had not changed since the last inspection. The reactor staff
, satisfied the training and experience required by the TS. Operation logs and records confirmed that shift staffing met the minimum requirements for duty and on-call personnel.
Since the last inspection the position of V.P. for Research and Director of the Arizona Research Labs (ARL) had been split. A new V.P. for Research had been appointed while the previous V.P. for Research was appointed Director of ARL.
The NRL Director still reports directly to the V.P. for Research, as required by.
Technical Specifications (TS). The Director ARL, who also reports to the V.P. of q
Research, is delegated authority to act for the V.P. of Research on NRL matters i
l (purchasing, payroll, etc.)
j c.
Conclusions
,
The research reactor operations staffing and organization satisfied TS L-requirement '
W
..
~
'
.
- ..
,
U
+
h-2-o q
01.2" Materials Control and Accountabilitv
{
.
a.
Insoection Scoos (85102)-
~ The inspector reviewed possession of riuclear material, inventory and i
e,'
accountability documents,'and verified the licensees implemen'ted program for I
L controlling and accounting of receipt, storage, transfers,-inventory, burn-up-related -
l measurements and calculations, shipment, and records and reports.
.
O b.
Findinos and Observations.
.
.
.
~
<
l The semiannual inventory of material was reviewed and verified. The material control and accountability program tracked locations and content of fuel under the
' research reactor license. Fuel burn-up-related measurements and calculations.
were acceptably performed and documented. The possession and use of SNM L
were limited to the locations and purposes authorized under the license. The (-
material control and accountability forms (DOE /NRC Forms 741 and 742) were prepared and transmitted as required. Fuelinventory and movement records were cross referenced and matched.
c.
Conclusions i
The licensee was in compliance wit.h the possession and use limits of the research
,
l reactor license, acceptably tracked burn-up and production of SNM, and had i
effective control of licensed materials as required, j
i i
IV. Plant Support R1 Radiological Protection and Chemistry Controls -
-
' R 1.1 - Radiation Protection' Postin.gg l..
l a.
~ Scoce (Insoection Procedure 69001)
l
..The inspector reviewed radiological signs and postings, routine radiation surveys, I
and observed the facility and equipment during accompanied tours, b.
Observations and Findinas
,
Postings were acceptable for the hazards involved. NRC Forms-3 were posted in j
'
the facility as were current notices to' workers required by 10 CFR Part 19.
,
c.
Qpnclusions :
!
_
<
l.
. Radiological postings satisfied regulatory requirements,
_
n (-
ti
'
..
..
.
- ..
,
l l-
-3-R1.2 Gaseous Effluent Monitorina and Releas3 a.
Scope (Inspection Procedure 69001)
'The inspector reviewed annual reports, release records, and counting and analysis results. The inspector interviewed reactor and HP staffs.
b.
Observations and Findinga Gaseous releases were calculated from integrated power using the COMPLY Code.
Releases were acceptably documented and well within the annual dose constraint-of 20.1101(d) and the Appendix B concentration limits.
c.
Conclusions Gaseous effluent monitoring and releases satisfied regulatory requirements.
R1.3 Radiation Protegtion Survevs a.
Scope (Inspection Procedure 69001)
The inspector reviewed procedures and survey records, and interviewed staff, b.
Observations and Findinas
Monthly and other periodic contamination and radiation surveys including pool I
water analyses were done by reactor and HP staffs as required by TS and licensee f
procedures. Results were evaluated and corrective actions taken and documented i
. when readings /results exceeded set action levels.
l Survey results verified that contamination in the facility was infrequent and that
)
identified contamination and radiation levels were well below regulatory and licensee limits.
c.
Conclusions
.
i Surveys were performed and documented as required by 10 CFR Part 20. TS and i
licensee requirements were met.
R1.4 Personnel Dosimetry l --
a.
Scope (Insoection Procedure 69001)
,
The inspector reviewed dosimetry records, licensee procedures, and interviewed staff.
<
Q-
-
.
..
b.
Observations and Findinas The licensee used a National Voluntary Laboratory Accreditation Program accredited vendor to process personnel dosimetry. An examination of records for the past two years showed that all exposures were within NRC limits, with most having no exposure above background. Records were reviewed by the radiation,
c.
Conclusions Doses were in conformance with licensee and 10 CFR Part 20 limits. The dosimetry program was conducted in accordance with 10 CFR 20.1501,10 CFR 20.1502, and licensee procedures.
R2'
Status of Radiation Protection and Control (RP&C) Facilities and Equipment a.
Scoce (Insoection Procedure 69001)
The inspector reviewed the licensee's inventory, calibration, and periodic checks of portable radiation survey and laboratory instruments, interviewed HP staff and
" toured the calibration range, b.
Observations and Findinas Calibrated instruments were available at the time of inspection. Instruments used to perform radiation surveys were calibrated with radioactive sources traceable to national standards and in accordance with ANSI or manufacturers'
recommendations. Calibration frequencies satisfied TS requirements.
The calibration of the laboratory instrumentation followed the manufacturers'
recommendations and used calibration sources traceable to national standards. All j
instruments checked were in calibration. Calibration records were in order.
]
In addition to commercial calibration sources, the radiation control office (RCO)
used sources prepared in-house from liquid standards. Although written documentation was sparse, the inspector determined that preparation and use of these calibration sources was acceptable. The licensee stated that they would evaluate the need for additional written documentation or procedures for these prepared sources. This will be reviewed in a future inspection as IFl 50-113/99-201-01, c.
Conclusions RP&C equipment was being maintained according to industry and equipment manufacturer standards. Calibrations satisfied TS requirements.
L1
k
-
'!
- ..
!
.-
i
>
-5-
[
R3.
RP&C Procedures and Documentation j,
a.
Scone (Insoection Procedure 69001)~
'
i
.
.
.
-
The inspector. reviewed RPP documentation and various HP procedures, and interviewed HP and reactor staffs.
b.
- Observations and Findinas i
The formal RPP is provided by the university staff..While the reactor staff performs some recurring surveys and job coverage, Radiation Control technicians were under the supervision of the RCO.
,
.
HP procedures were available for those tasks and items required by the TS, license, and facility directives. - Changes were reviewed and approved as required.
The RCO had performed the annual audit / reviews of the RPP as required.
c.
Conclusions
.The RPP satisfied the requirements of 10 CFR 20.1101. Oversight and review were provided by the reactor and university staffs as required by TS and licensee procedures. HP procedures met TS requirements.
R5 Staff Training and Qualification in RP&C ac Scone (Insoection Procedure 69001)
'
The inspector reviewed ' training records, campus training records, training program content, and licensee procedures, and interviewed staff.
.
- b.
Observations and Findinas Training was provided to visitors or workers by individual lectures and/or formal classes with exams. Specific training is given based on the workers access needs.
Review of the training records of the newest staff member confirmed that the University of Arizona Radiation Source Protection Course training had been provided.
Recurring.HP training to the reactor staff was acceptably provided by the requalification training program, c.
Conclusions '
Radiation worker training met license requirements, conformed to licensee procedures, and satisfied-10 CFR 19.12 for instruction to workers.
!
l.
l L
.
o
... -
.
p-6-RS..
RP&C Organization and Administration
'a.-
Scope (Insoection Procedure 69001)
t
~-The inspector reviewed RPP documentation, the FSAR and the TS, and interviewed staff, j
'
b.
Observations and Findinas The university radiation safety staff consisted of the Director RCO, the Deputy
.
Radiation Safety Officer, and a number of senior health physicists and numerous
{
HP technicians. Their training and experience, met the qualifications required by
{
TS. The university staff provided independent surveys, on-call support surveys, required safety oversight surveys, and specialized training to the reactor staff. No lapse in coordination between the HP and reactor staffs was noted.
i c.
Conclusions HP staffing met regulatory requirements and licensee commitments.
R7 Quality Assurance in RP&C Activities L
a.
Insoection Scoce (Insoection Procedure 69001)
!
The inspector reviewed RC minutes, annual reviews, audits, the audit and program
i checklist, interviewed staffi and attended the May 6,1999 meeting.
b.
Observations and Findinos l
l RC' membership satisfied TS requirements and the Committee's procedural rules.
The RC had quarterly meetings as required. Review of the minutes and attendance at the meeting showed that the RC provided guidance, direction, safety oversight, and ensured suitable use of the reactor.
The RC provided both direct reactor operations and radiation safety oversight and control for the NRL. A senior campus radiation control office (RCO) staff, who functioned as the reactor radiation safety officer, was a permanent member of the RC. Examination of records of RC actions and attendance at the May 6 meeting confirmed that the committee was reviewing HP operations as required. The committee provided appropriate guidance, direction and oversight to the radiation safety progra,
.
..........
_. _ _ _ _ _ - _ _
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
,
.
..
-7-c.~
Conclusions The RC meeting frequency satisfied TS requirements. The RC carried out its safety duties as obligated by license, TS, and administrative criteria. HP oversight was acceptably provided by the RC.
R8 Radioactive Material Transfer / Disposal a.
Inspection Scoce Unsoection Procedure 85102)
The inspector reviewed transfer checklists, shipping and disposal records, and interviewed staff.
b.
Observations and Findinas Production of radioactive waste at the facility was minimal. The small amount produced was held until a direct shipment to an authorized waste repository could be made. All transfers were recorded on the appropriate forms. Transfer documentation was kept on file as required and was acceptable.
By letter dated November 25,1998, the NRL filed a written report, as required by TS section 6.7.c.4.a, regarding an observed inadequacy in the implementation of administrative nr procedural controls, it was discovered, during a review of University of Arizona Research Reactor (UARR) procedures, that UARR 127, Procedure for Shipping and Receiving Special Nuclear Material had not been followed during the last three shipments of SNM.
UARR 127 was originally reviewed and approved by the RC on June 4,1981. It required prior notification to and approval from the RC for all SNM shipments.
Although these three shipments, the only ones in the last decade, were in full compliance with Federal (NRC and DOT), state, and University of Arizona RCO regulations, requirements, and procedures, UARR 127 notification and approval requirements were not followed. No health, safety, or security interest was compromised.
The error was reported to the RC and discussed by the committee at their November 3,1998, meeting. The committee concluded the oversight was not wilful and directed that training be provided to the reactor staff on the scope and applicability of UARR procedures. In addition the NRL director and supervisor would be required to take a graded test on this subject given by the RC Chairman.
The inspector. verified that the SNM shipments conformed to all applicable
. requirements, that training was given as directed by the RC, and that the NRL director and supervisor passed the test given by the RC chairman.
!
.-...
..
-
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
_______
r,
.
n
.
-8-l The licensee stated that in light of the present requirements (NRC, DOT, and RCO)
for shipping SNM, they would evaluate whether UARR 127 is still needed. This l
will bc reviewed in a future inspection as IFl 50-113/99-201-02,
c.
Conclusions Radioactive material was generally transferred and disposed in accordance with a
,
licensee procedures, TS,10 CFR Part 49 and 10 CFR Part 20 requirements. The November 25,1998, letter satisfied TS section 6.7.c.4.a. reporting requirements.
Licensee actions regarding SNM shipping were acceptable.
l P1 Conduct of Emergency Preparedness Activities and Staff Training l
- a.
Insoection Scoce (Insoection Procedure 69001)
'
l The inspector reviewed the EP procedures, training and drill records for the l
reactor, interviewed staffs and observed the May 6,1999, drill.
b.
Observations,and Findinos The drill documentation consisted of a scenario, a description of the emergency
{
responders' actions as noted by the designated observers, and a summary of the
~
critique of the exercise by the participants and observers. This acceptably documented the drill. The exercises were conducted accordirig to, and fulfilled, the requirements st:pulated in the Emergency Plan. Key licensee emergency response personnel demonstrated that they could respond to emergencies as required. Offsite response by campus security, medical, and other responders was acceptable for the scenario involved, items identified by individual critiques were addressed, evaluated, and then incorporated when appropriate.
Training records verified that acceptable training had been provided to li.-house staff and outside responders.
The May 6,1999, dr.:,cenario combined medical and radioactive contamination problems. The responding EP staff evaluated and treated the injury and contamination in regards to their significance. The medical injury was treated immediately while minimizing the spread of contamination. Communication difficulties were overcome by using runners for messages while still maintaining control of the incident. The after drill critique was open and productive.
The drill acceptably tested the licensee's ability to respond to an emergency and demonstrated that key licensee emergency response personnel could respond to emergencies as required.
l I
7,.,
.
(.
..
.g.
- c.
Conclusions The licensee's emergency plan was sf' fectively carried out as required. EP drills
,
. and training were acceptably being conducted.
X1 Exit Meeting Summery.
,
'
The inspector presented the inspection results to members of licensee management at the conclusion of the inspection during exit meetings on May 6
' and 7,1999. The licensee acknowledged the findings presented.
t
l i
!-
i
.
I i
~
.,
.
...
,
PARTIAL LIST OF PERSONS CONTACTED
'
Licensee
'H. Doane Reactor Supervisor
'T. Hixon Associate V.P. for Research
'
'E. Hochheiser Manager, Operational Health Physics i
M. Poppe HP Technician
'D. Silvain Reactor Radiation Safety Officer
'C. Soundhaus Director, Radiation Control Office M. Susalle HP Technician
- J. Williams Reactor Director l
- Attended Exit Meeting l
lNSPECTION PROCEDURE (IP) USED IP 69001:
CLASS ll NON-POWER REACTORS j
IP 85102:
MATERIAL CONTROL AND ^.CCOUNTING i
ITEMS OPENED, CLOSED, AND DISCUSSED Opened IFl 50-113/99-701-01 THE LICENSEE WOULD EVALUATE THE NEED FOR ADDITIONAL WRITTEN DOCUMENTATION OR PROCEDURES FOR CALIBRATION SOURCES PREPARED IN-HOUSE.
IFl 50-113/99-20102 LICENSEE TO EVALUATE WHETHER UARR PROCEDURE 127 IS
STILL NEEDED.
Closed NONE
'
PARTIAL LIST OF ACRONYMS USED HP Health Physics EP Emergency Plan
'
FSAR Final Safety Analysis Report
NRC Nuclear Regulatory Commission NRL Nuclear Reactor Laboratory RPP Radiation Protection Program RSO Radiation Safety Officer RC Reactor Committee SNM Special Nuclear Material TS Technical Specifications RC-Reactor Committee art.
Arizorm Research Labs RCO Red:ation Controi Office UARR University of Arizona Research Reactor TS Technical Specifications
j