IR 05000128/1999201
| ML20209F030 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 05000128 |
| Issue date: | 07/09/1999 |
| From: | NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20209F022 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-128-99-201, NUDOCS 9907150203 | |
| Download: ML20209F030 (13) | |
Text
-
.
.A
.
.
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION Docket No: 50-128 License No: R-83 l
Report No: 50-128/99-201 i
l l Licensee: Texas A&M University l
!
,
l Facility: Texas Engineering Experiment Station L
Nuclear Science Center Location: Cc!:ege Station, Texas Dates: - June 8-10,1999 l
Inspector: Stephen W. Holmes, Reactor inspector
!
Approved by: Ledyard B. Marsh, Chief Events Assessment, Generic Communicationn and Non-Power Reactors Branch Division of Regulatory improvement Programs Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation A
9907150203 990709 PDR ADOCK 05000128 G PDR
n
,
.
I
-
]
,
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ,
i
- This routine, announced inspection consisted of the review of selected conditions and
,
records since the last inspection, verification of corrective actions previously committed to by the licensee, and related discussions with licensee personnel. The inspection was conducted following the guidance of NRC Inspection Manua Oo* rations
- With a new Assistant Director (AD), organizational and administrative controls remain consistent with Technical Specification (TS) and license requirements and licensee commitments, l l
- The material control and accountability program satisfied regulatory requirement Special nuclear material (SNM) possession and use limits were satisfie l Plant Support
' * Radiological postings satisfied regulatory requirement * Gaseous effluent monitoring and releases satisfied regulatory requirement * Liquid effluent monitoring and releases satisfied regulatory requirement * The environmental monitoring program was being conducted as required. Doses to the public did not exceed 10 CFR 20.1301 limit * Surveys and analyses were performed and documented as required by 10 CFR 20, TS, and licensee procedures
- The dosimetry program was conducted in accordance'with 10 CFR 20.1501,10 CFR 20.1502, and licensee procedures. Doses were in conformance with licensee and 10 CFR Part 20 limit * Radiation protection and control (RP&C) equipment was being maintained according to industry and equipment manufacturer standards. Calibrations satisfied TS requirement * 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 staff * Health physics (HP) procedures met TS requirement _
.,
'
. l
' e Radiation worker training met license requirements, conformed to licensee procedures, and satisfied 10 CFR 19.12 for instruction to worker * HP staffing met regulatory requirements and licensee commitment !
- The Reactor Safety Board (RSB) carried out its safety duties as obligated by license, I TS, and adininistrative criteria. HP oversight was acceptably provided by the RS lq i
e
.
Radioactive material was transferred and stored in accordance with licensee procedures, TS,10 CFR Part 49, and 10 CFR Part 20 requirement ,
?
!
l l
)
l
1
]
l l
- -
.,
.
-
Report Detalla Summary of Plant Status
]
During the inspection the reactor was operated daily to support experiments, training, and l
service work. Normal periodic maintenance and operational cNcks were being performe '
Material shipping and receiving operation were ongoin Operations l
~
01 Conduct of Operations 01.1 Reactor Staffina Insoection Scoce (Insoection Procedure 69001)
The inspector reviewed the Nuclear Science Center staff positions, lines of authority, and interviewed staff, Observations and Fir,dinos There had been one significant change in the reactor staffing since the last Inspection. The previous AD had left and a new individual hired to fill the vacant position. The new AD was in training for his SRO license as required by TS. The AD's academic training and experience satisfied TS requirement Conclusions The new AD satisfied TS operations staffing d organization requirement .2 Materials Control and Accountability I Insoection Scoce (85102)
The in.spector reviewed possession of nuclear material, inventory and accountability i
'
documents, and verified the licensee's program for controlling and accounting of
~ SNM, receipt, storage, trar,sfers, inventory, burn-up related measurements and calculations, shipment, and records end report !
i
I
)
i I
'
L l
.
.
,
2- Findinas'and Observations The semiannualinventory 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 were limited to the locatio 1s and purposes authorized under the license. The material control and accountability forms (DOE /NRC Forms 741 and 742) were prepared ,
and transmitted as required. Fuel inventory and movement records were cross referenced and matche .The facility representative, after an extended search, was able to locate and the inspector verify three randomly selected items listed on the SNM inventor Conclusions The licensee was in compliance with the possession and use limits of the research reactor license, acceptably tracked burn-up and production of SNM, and had l
effective control of licensed materials as require IV. Plant Support R1 Radiological Protection and Chemistry Controls R1.1 Radiation Protection Postinas Scoce (Insoection Procedure 69001)
The inspector reviewed radiological signs and postings, routine radiation surveys, and observed the facility and equipment during accompanied tour . Observations and Findinas Postings were acceptable for the hazards involved. Contamination postings as well l: as dosimetry and protective clothing requirements were acceptably posted at the entrance to the material handling area. NRC Forms-3 were posted in the facility as were current notices to workers required by 10 CFR Part 1 . Conclusions Radiological postings satisfied regulatory requirement .
-3-R1.2 Gaseous Effluent Monitorina and Release
~ Scope (Insoection Procedure 69001)
The inspector reviewed annual reports, release records, and counting and analysis results. The inspector interviewed reactor and HP staff j l Meations and Findinaq l (
Gaseous and particulate releases were calculated from integrated counts from their I respective monitoring instruments. The dose to the public was calculated using the COMPLY Code. Releases were acceptably documented and well within the annual dose constraint of 20.1101(d) and the Appeocax B concentration limit Conclusion _s Gaseous effluent monitoring and releases satisfied regulatory requirement R1.3 Liauid Effluent Monitorina and Release
' Scone (Insoection Procedure 69001) I l
The inspector reviewed annual reports, release records, and counting and analysis results. The inspector interviewed operator and HP staff members, Observations and Findinas l
l Liquid waste from the Nuclear Science Center (NSC) is held in above ground steel l waste tanks and is sampled, analyzed, and verified to meet 10 CFR 20, l Appendix B, Table 2, Column 2, concentrations prior to release to the environmen l l
The present waste system is being replaced with fiberglast tanks and a recirculating water system to stir the liquid waste providing a homogeneous l
mixture prior to samplin The present system is stirred by pumping additional water through jets" in the bottom of the tank. While verifying effluent calculations, the inspector could not determine from the written procedures or sampling / calculation documentation whether this extra water had been taken into account in computing the individual release volumes. Since the tanks were sampled after being stirred this would not have affected release concentration measurements but would affect calculation of the total curies released. TS restricts the annual release to 1.0 curies. The inspector calculated that a release of .0042 curies rather than .0035 uuries could have occurred during 1998 if the extra water volume had not been accounted for.
, Interviews with the HP technicians, who carry out the procedure, indicated that tank volume was r;atermined after stirring and therefore did take into account the additional water volume.
_
L I
. \
l-4-The NSC radiation safety officer (RSO) stated that the procedure would be modified )
to clearly indicate when and how measurements and samples were to be take Additionally the RSO stated that release result records would also De updated to better re lect release information. This will be reviewed in a future inspection as IFl 50 128/99-201-0 Conclusions .
Liquid effluent monitoring and releases satisfied regulatory requirement I R1.4 Environmental Monitorina l l Scooe (Insoection Procedure 69001)
The inspector reviewed environmental results, reviewed dose calculations, toured perimeter environmental monitoring locations, and interviewed staf Observations and Findinas An environmental monitoring program is conducted jointly with the Texas Department of Health. Multiple water and milk samples are collected and analyzed quarterly by the NSC and Texas Department of Health as scheduled by this cooperative surveillance program. Integrated direct radiation doses are measured at the exclusion area boundary with dosimeters provided and processed by Texas Department of Health, Bureau of Radiation Control, Division of Environmental Program Results from this monitoring program and gasecus and liquid releases demonstrated that the total effective dme equivalent to the individual likely to receive the highest dose from the licensed operatiori did not exceed the annual dose limit of 0.1 ram (1 millisievert) in a year, as required by 10 CFR 20.1301, Conclusions The environmental monitoring program was being conducted as required. Doses to the public did not exceed 10 CFR 20.1301 limit R1.5 Radiation Protection Survevs Scoce (Insoection Procedure 69001)
The inspector reviewed HP procedures, contamination and radiation area survey records, and effluent release records. Additionally the inspector toured the NSC to include the exterior waste storage building, and interviewed staf _ _
-
'
~
b l
.
!
-5- Observations and Findinas Periodic surface and airborne contamination and area radiation surveys, air filter, pool and cooling tower water, and other analyses were performed by HP staff as required by TS and licensee procedures. Required due dates were tracked using the MICROSOFT oulook calendar program. Results were evaluated and corrective actions taken and documented when readings /results exceeded set action level ]
Surveys were sufficient and reasonable under the circumstances to evaluate the, extent of radiation arid contamination leve!s and potential radiological hazards present at the NS i Survey results verified that unanticipated contamination in the facility was infrequent and that identified contamination and radiation levels were well below regulatory and licensee limits. Contamination in posted areas was also controlled to levels mer'ing the facility's ALARA goals as well as regulatory requi.ement Conclusions Surveys and' analyses were performed and documented as required by 10 CFR Part 20. TS and licensee requirements were me R1.6 P_ersonnel Dosimetry Scone Unsoection Procedure 69001)
'
The inspector reviewed dosimetry records, licensee procedures, and interviewed staff, Observations and Findinas
The licensee used a National Voluntary Laboratory Accreditation Program certified !
vendor to process personnel dosimetry. The dosimetry was provided thro' gh the campus radiation safety office. Records were reviewed monthly by the NSC RS The inspector reviewed records of a declared pregnant worker and determined that
,
the declared pregnancy program was effectively being implemente l l
,
An examination of records for the past two years showed that all exposures were 3 within NRC limits and with one exception met the f acility's ALARA program goal !
One worker, the reactor supervisor, occasionally exceeded the NSC's ALARA dose j goals. As required by the facility procedures, investigations were performed and ]
the individual was sent a notice directing him to limit further exposures. The !
licensee concluded that his exposures were ALARA and commensurate with his workload. The inspector confirmed this conclusion by reviewing the supervisor's work history, and interviewing him, other operations staff, and the RS Specifically, the work was required and there was no reasonable way to further ;
reduce the dos U
.
.?
a l
.
. I 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 procedure R2 Status of Radiation Protection and Control (RP&C) Facilities and Equipment I Scoce (Insoection Procedure 69001) '
l The inspector reviewed the licensee's inventory, calibration, and periodic checks of portable radiation survey and laboratory instruments, interviewed HP staff and i
observed the calibration rang < Observations and Findinos
Calibrated instruments were available at the time of inspection. Portable instruments used to perform contamination and radiation surveys were calibrated by NSC staff or by certified vendors. Calibrations were performed with radioactive sources traceable to national standards and in accordance with ANSI or manufacturers' recommendations. Calibration i.aquencies satisfied TS l requirements. Calibration source geometries matched that of the samnles '
analyze Calibrations of facility air monitors and are* radiation monitors were performed as required by Technical Specification The calibration of the laboratory instrumentation followed the manufacturers'
[ recommendations and used calibration sources traceable or comparable to national standards. All instrumenu checked were in calibration. Calibration records were in orde Daily energy checks were performed on the multichannel analyzer's high purity germanium crystal detector prior to use. The unit was not to be used untilit passed the computerized energy test. Normally, failure was indicate.d by none of the thirteen test peaks being identified as valid and no energy spectrum being printed out. Staff would diagnose the malfunction, correct the problem, and rerun the daily check before the unit would be use During review of daily energy check records the inspector found two occurrences where the lowest energy peak'of the thirteen was identified by the program as an
" invalid peak." No documentation could be found of a recheck of the unit prior to its being used those days. There were no formal written procedures for the daily energy check nor instructions for what constituted acceptable result ,
'
e
.
, .
.
l 7-The RSO stated that written guidance would be prepared, using the manufacture's I recommendations or evaluation of the daily energy checks. This will be reviewed in a future inspection as IFl 50-128/99-201-0 Conclusions RP&C equipment was being maintained according to industry and equipment manufacturer standards. Calibrations satisfied TS requirement R3 RP&C Procedures and Documentation a. Scoce Onsoection Procedure 69001)
The inspector reviewed RPP documentation and various HP procedures, and interviewed HP and reactor staff I b. Observations and Findinas )
!
The RPP consists of the NSC SOP and is formally identified in SOP A1- Revision 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 RSO had performed the annual auditheviews of the RPP as require c. Conclusions I The RPP satisfied the requiremente of 10 CFR 20.1101. Oversight and review were provided as required by TS and licensee procedures. HP procedures met TS requirement R5 Staff Training and Qualitication in RP&C a. Scope Unsocction Procedure 69001)
The inspector reviewed training records, campus training records, training program content, and licensee procedures, and interviewed staf 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 need Review of selected personnel training records confirmed that workers were provided proper instructions in radiation protection practices, in accordance with 10 CFR 19.1 n, -
. l
.
-8-P.ecurring HP training to the reactor staff was acceptably provided by the requalification training progra Qln_cludOns l
Radiation worker training met license requirements, conformed to licensee procedures, and satisfied 10 CFR 19.12 for instruction to worker R RP&C Organization and Administration
)
1 Scope (Insoection Procedure 69001)
The inspector reviewed RPP documentation, the TS, and interviewed staf Observations and Findinas The NSC HP staff consisted of a newly hired RSO who previously worked for the campus RSO, two HP technicians, and two part-time students. The RSO was just completing her Doctorate degree and the senior technician's previous experience was in the Navy nuclear program. The staff was knowledgeable of the radiation hazards present at the NSC, proficient in performing calibrations and surveys, and confident in their abilities, Conclusions HP staffing met .egulatory requirements and licensee commitment R7 Quality Assurance in RP&C Activities insoection Scope (Inspection Procedure 69001)
The inspector reviewed RSB minutes, annual reviews, audits, experiment reviews, and interviewed staf Observations and Findinas The RSB provided radiation safety oversight and control for the NSC in addition to its reactor operations supervision. The campus and NSC RSO's were permanent members of the RSB. -Examination of records confirmed that the committee was l reviewing HP operations and provided acceptable guidance, direction, and oversight l to the radiation safety progra .~
.,.
..
!
l
,
. Conclusions The RSB carried out its safety duties as obligated by license, TS, and administrative criteria. HP oversight was acceptably provided by the RS R8 Radioactive Material Transfer / Storage Inspection Scope (Insoection Procedure 86740)
The inspector reviewed transfer checklists, shipping and disposal records, toured the radioactive waste storage building, and interviewed staf b.' Observations and Findinas Solid waste normally consisted of rubber gloves, paper, plastic, and other laboratory wastes contaminated with small amounts of radioactive material. The waste storage building housed bags of radioactive waste material stored for deca The inspector confirmed that the bags were labsled.in accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR 20.1904. All transfers were recorded on the appropriate forms. Transfer documentation was kept on file as required and was acceptable, Conclusions Radioactive material was transferred and stored in accordance with licensee procedures, TS,10 CFR Part 49, and 10 CFR Part 20 requirement V. Manaaement Meetinas
?
X1 Exit Meeting Summary The inspe tor presented the inspection results to members of licensee management at the conclusion of the inspection on June 8,1999. The licensee acknowledged
-
the findings presente l l
l t ;
- _
_
~
f^ . l
.- 1 l
i PARTIAL LIST OF PERSONS CONTACTED Licensee > [
l
- D. Reece Director, NSC
- ATTENDED EXIT MEETING l
l' SPECTION PROCEDURE (IP) USED-IP 69001 CLASS ll NOncPOWER REACTORS l IP 85102 MATERIAL CONTROL AND ACCOUNTING - REACTORS !
IP 86740 INSPECTION OF TRANSPORTATION ACTIVITIES f
}
s ITEMS OPENED, CLOSED, AND DISCUSSED ;
I Opened j IFl 50128/99-201-01 Liquid effluent procedures and calculations would be modified to l
clarify sampling and better reflect release information IFl 50-128/99-201-02 Written guidance would be prepared for evaluation of the daily energy check Closed-NONE )
PARTIAL LIST OF ACRONYMS USED A Assistant Director HP Health Physics ;
NRC Nuclear Regulatory Commission l
'
NSC Nuclear Science Center RP&C Radiation Protection and Control RPP Radiation Protection Program )
RSB Reactor Safety Board I RSO . Radiation Safety Officer l SNM Special Nuclear Material l
TS Technical Specifications i Xe Xenon
!