IR 05000141/1982001
| ML20052C328 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 05000141 |
| Issue date: | 04/22/1982 |
| From: | Book H, Garcia E, Wenslawski F NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20052C325 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-141-82-01, 50-141-82-1, NUDOCS 8205040649 | |
| Download: ML20052C328 (3) | |
Text
7
.
.f U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION V
Report No.
50-141/82-01
> Docket No.
50-141 License No.
R-60 Licensee:
Stanford University 67 Encina Hall Stanford, California 94305 Facility Name:
Stanford Research Reactor Inspection at:
Stanford, California Inspection conducted:
March 10, 1981 Inspector:
M/,
web Apr R2, /fN E. M. Garcia,' Radiation Specialist Date Signed
[. /b
//Ja/f2 Approved by:
a.
F. A. Wenslawski, Chief, Reactor Radiation Protection Dats Signed
Section
.
,.
&l.6.bcde
$u/ez-H. E. Book, Chief, Radiological Safety Branch Date Signed Summary:
.Inspecticn on March 10, 1982 (Report No. 50-141/82-01)
lA eas Inspected:
Unannounced inspection to detemine the status of licensee progress in the decontamination of the facility that previously housed the Stanford Research Reactor, and to detemine the licensee's plans to fulfil the dismantling order requirements. The inspection involved two inspection hours by a NRC inspector.
. Resul t's :
No items of noncompliance were idantified.
~
r
.
,
820'5040649 820422
~
RV' Form 219(2)
PDR ADOCK 05000141 i
O PDR
_
]
_
.
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted Dr. R. A. Finston, Director Health Physics and Biosafety J. A. Holmes, Senior Health Physicist 2.
Personnel Interview The inspector met with the individuals noted above and discussed the current status of implementation of the dismantling order and the licensee's plans for completing the work.
The disposition of the reactor components has been discussed in Insp~ection Report No.
50-141/79-01.
By a letter of March 17, 1981 from John F. Stolz to Dr. Finston, the Comission described the levels of radiation that would be acceptable for release of the facility to unrestricted access.
Since then, the licensee has taken no additional action to remove the remaining activation products present i_n the concrete
-
floor that was beneath the reactor core. At this time, the University does not need to use the space occupied by the biological shield.
It is the licensee's position that the reduction of'the small remaining radiation levels to those noted on the letter of March 17, 1982 would involve the unnecessary expenditure of resources and exoosure. The current plan of the licensee is to allow the remaining activity to decay to acceptable levels.
The inspector discussed some alternatives with the licensee.
One alternative is for the licensee to submit a report to 'the
~.
Commission of the potential exposure level based on a realistic s
pathway analysis, using actual dose rates at spe'cific locations and_
realistic estimates of occupancy at those locations.
The intent of this effort would be to re-evaluate the specified release criteria in light of realistic dose potential.
The Director, Health Physics and Biosafety stated that they would consider this alternative.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
3.
Facility Tour The reactor facility is located in a building called Ryan Lab-oratory. The building is currently used for the storage of furniture and other equipment. There is an electronic security system to detect unauthorized entry. The remains of the reactor, the biological shield, is a concrete structure raising 25 feet from the floor of the building. The area with radiation levels above background is inside the biological shield at ground level.
Access into the biological shield is either from the top or by removing a large concrete and steel plug on the side of the shield. The access,at the top is blocked by a three quarter inch plywood sheet that is nailed to the shield. The plug is. secured to the shield by a lock
.
-
--.y.
.
-w.
-e,--
,,_v
n-
.
.-
.._
-2-and chain.
Surveys performed by the licensee at the time of the inspection using a Health Physics Instruments Model 1010 multiplying ion chamber indicated radiation levels inside the biological shield to be about 30 urad/hr above background at a meter above the floor. There was no indication that the area inside the biological-shield-had any frequent visitation. The security measures appear adequate for the potential radiological hazard.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
4.
Exit Interview-The inspector stated that no items of noncompliance had been identified and reiterated the comments regarding the realistic.
pathway exposure analysis mentioned above.
The inspector suggested the licensee contact the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation to discuss the matter in more detail. The Director of Health Physics and Biosafety stated that he would consider the _ inspector's comments.
,
+
O f
.
O I
- .
'
,n.,
, n
, -.
-
-
, - ~
w
-