IR 05000142/1982002
| ML20062H584 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 05000142 |
| Issue date: | 07/20/1982 |
| From: | Morrill P, Stewart P, Thomas Young NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20062H575 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-142-82-02, 50-142-82-2, NUDOCS 8208160105 | |
| Download: ML20062H584 (4) | |
Text
. $
.
. ,
,
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY C0KIISSION
REGION V
Report N /82-02 Docket N License N R-71 Safeguards Group Licensee: University of California at los Angeles Los Angeles, California 90024
' Facility Name: UCLA Research Reactor (Argonaut-100KW)
Inspection at: UCLA Campus ,
, .
r Inspection conducted: June 28-30,1932 Inspectors:
'
20 M Date Signbd P. Morri l , Reactor Ins)ector OYW '
JO I)ulq ?';>--
P. Stewart, Reactor Inspector Date' Sig#ed Approved by: .k 90 Jd MN T. Youn ), Jr., Chief, Reacto# Projects Section 2 Date Signed Reactor Operations' Projects Branch Summary:
Inspection on June 28-30, 1982 (Report No. 50-142/82-02)
Areas Inspected: Routine, unannounced inspection of licensee's organization, logs and records, review and audit function, requalification training, procedures, calibrations, and experiment This inspection invo*1ved 32 inspector-hours on-site by two NRC inspector Results One item of noncompliance was identified in one are ;
P
,
t 8208160105 820722 RV Form 219(2)
-_ - . _ . , - , __
.
.
DETAILS Persons Contacted :
R. Reyes, Health Physicist
- N. Ostrander, Manager, Nuclear Energy Laboratory
- A. Zane, Reactor Supervisor
- Denotes those attending the exit intervie . Organization, Logs and Records Mr. Bob Reyes is now the health physicist. There are presently three licensed operators at the facilit Two of the operators hold senior reactor operator license The records of operations for the period since the last inspection (June 1981) were examined. These records included the operations
. logs, pre-start checklists, maintenance repair and calibration logs, and operating procedures. The data of the 1981 (draft)
Annual Report was also examine The inspector stated that the submittal of the Annual Report appeared to be slipping to later in the year, which was not acceptabl Licensee representatives stated that the 1981 Annual Report would
'
be submitted by the end of July 1982 and that the 1982 Annual Report would be submitted by the end of April 198 '
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identifie . Review and Audit The minutes of the Radiation Use Committee (RUC) meetings since the last inspection were reviewed to verify that the RUC review and audit functions were consistent with the requirements of the -
Technical Specifications. Meetings have been held at the frequency required by the Technical Specifications, and the membership of each meeting satisfied quorum requirement '
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identifie . Requalification Training The inspector, through review of records, verified that the re- .
qualification program is being performed in accordance with the approved program. Records indicated satisfactory completion of lecture attendance and examinations by all participants. There are also continuous records maintained of each operator's reactivity manipulations indicating that all have been actively engaged as
'
i operators or senior operator No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
?'
i
- - - . .
Q
.
,' -2- Procedures The inspector performed an examination of the technical adequacy of procedures, and of adherence to these procedures by licensed ,
operators. The inspector also observed a checkout of the facility prior to operation, startup, and operation at 100KW, The following procedures were examined:
Normal Startup, September 9,1980 Standard Shutdown, April 7,1980 Sample Handling Procedure, April 7,1980 Pre-Startup Check-off, April 7,1980 The inspector observed that the licensee's personnel were using a handwritten addendum, dated January 11, 1982, to the pre-start check-off list. The reactor supervisor explained that he had written this addendum to reflect replacement of the electronic instrumentation for the power linear channels in December 198 The inspectors observed that-the procedure should be signed and dated by the reactor supervisor to document his approval. The inspectors also observed that Section VII.J of the Technical Specifications requires this type of change to be submitted to the Director on a routine basis. Since the addendum had been in use for approximately six months, the inspectors stated that the routine submission was overdue and, consequently, that this was an item of noncompliance. Licensee representatives stated that they would improve their administrative work as required by the Technical Specification . Surveillance The inspector examined selected surveillance records and discussed these surveillances with licensee personnel. Surveillances examined included: rod worth, rod drop times, shutdown margin, excess reactivity, calibration of neutron instruments, calibration of area radiation monitors, and temperature coefficient of reactivity. The inspector also observed the performance of operability surveillance j tests as part of the startup checklist as required by paragraph of the Technical Specifications.
l, l No items of noncompliance or deviations were identifie . Experiments The inspector examined 14 of the current experiments and three f experiments approved in 1981 after the last inspection (June 1981).
l The experiments are described and reviewed on Experimental Safety Analysis (ESA) forms in accordance with the Technical Specifications.
'
The inspector also observed that the licensee is reviewing and l
l >
.
.. .
.
,
-3-rewriting ESAs on a yearly basis to keep the experiment log more curren No items of noncompliance or deviations were identifie . Follow-up on Licensee Reportable Item An apparent violation of UCLA's Technical Specifications was reported by licensee personnel to the NRC on October 29,1981 and followed up by a letter dated November 16, 1981. The apparent violation occurred on October 23, 1981, when licensee personnel failed to insert all control plates prior to removal of a large negative reactivity (Technical Specification VII.B.2).
The inspector confirmed the licensee's corrective actions outlined in the licensee's November 16, 1981 letter and the circumstance surrounding the. original occurrence. Based on a review of licensee records and discussions with licensee personnel, the inspector confirmed that the Radiation Use Committee (RUC) had directed that any new or novel experiment, as well as any associated experiment procedures, will be reviewed by the RUC prior to performing the experiment. The inspector concluded that this was a licensee identified violation for which adequate corrective action had been taken. No further action is planne . Exit Interview The inspectors met with the licensee representatives (denoted in paragraph 1) at the conclusion of the inspection on June 30, 198 The inspectors summarized the scope of the inspection and the finding <
1 4 i