IR 05000148/1992001
| ML20126B223 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 05000148 |
| Issue date: | 12/15/1992 |
| From: | Murray B NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20126B221 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-148-92-01, 50-148-92-1, NUDOCS 9212220014 | |
| Download: ML20126B223 (7) | |
Text
~ _ _ . _ . _ . _ . . . _ _ _ . _ .
.
.
.
APPENDIX U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION IV ,
.
Inspection Report: 50-148/92-01 Operating License: R-78 Licensee: The University of Kansas Lawrence, Kansas 66045-2223 Facility Name: Nuclear Reactor Center inspection At: Lawrence, Kansas inspection Conducted: December 2, 1992 Inspector: A. D. Gaines, Radiation Specialist Facilities Inspection Programs Section Approved: HAleed B.Miirra#y, Chlef, Fac 'lities inspection lYhk Ddte /
Programs Sectio InsDeClion Summary Areas inspected: Routine, announced inspection of the radiation protection program as it pertained to the decommissioning of the reacto Results:
o Proper personnel decommissioning monitoring activities (was1.2.1)
paragraph provided
. for personnel involved with e Radiation and contamination surveys were properly performed and documented (paragraph 1.2.2).
- Proper calibration and quality control checks were performed on radiation detection instrumentation (paragraph 1.2.3),
e Areas were correctly posted and controlled (paragraph 1.2.4).
- Proper 10 CFR 19.12 instructions were provided for radiation workers (paragraph 1.2.5).
- Shipments of radioactive waste were performed properly (paragraph 1.2.6),
o Good audits of decommissioning activities were performed (paragraph 1.3).
~
9212220014 921215 PDR ADOCK 05000148 G PDR-
- - -
, .
. . . . ._ , -
._ ._ __ - - . , _ - . . . _ . . . _ _ _ _ . . _ . . . _ _ . . _ _ . _ _ _ . _ . _ _ _ _. _ . _ _ _ . . -. __._ . _.- _.___
,
.
-.
.
.
-2- l
<
Sy m . 1 itction findinos:
- No violations or deviations were identifie MChmerit :
Attachment 1 - Persons Contacted and Exit Meeting
,
k i
t E
,n,, . , , .,,yp-w-p.w,-,,-e-nam,,,+m a - , -- - , - - - ~ -
9 -
+ -e-,-r-.- < - - ,- - e ,- -s w,.- s.-,.,-y,.m,,-.g - .a_
. - . - . .- - -. .. .-
.
.
,
.
-3-DETAIL 5 1 CLASS II NON-POWER REACTORS (40750)
The licensee's program was inspected to determine compliance with 10 CFR Parts 19 and 20, and agreement with the Order Authorizing Dismantling of Facility and Disposition of Component Parts - University of Kansas Research Reactor issued Septemb r 19, 1991, Backaround The University of Kansas research reactor was shut down in June 198 Following reactor shutdown, reactor fuel was shipped to a Department of Energy (D02) Facility for final storage and disposa On September 19, 1991, the Order Authorizing Dismantling of Facility and Disposition of Component Parts - University of Kansas Research Reactor was issued allowing the licensee to decomission the facility. The licensee hired a contractor to perf orm the decomissioning activities and another contractor as an executive engineer to oversee and review the activities of the decomissioning contractor. Decomissioning activities by the contractor comenced on September 10, 1992. As of December 2, 1992, the contractor had finished the following decomissioning tasks:
e Initial radiation survey of equipment, structures, and areas, e Removal of the aluminum reactor tan ,
e Removal of activated concrete in the biological shiel e Removal nf activated portions of the beam ports and pneumatic tub * Packaging, shipping, and dis)osal of irradiated and contaminated material, equipment, and rub)le at a low-level wasta repositor s Final radiation survey of facilit * Prepared a draft final report for the license The concrete monolith that had housed and shielded the reactor was in the process of being demolished. The licensee expects to finish with the monolith's demolition by December 15, 199 .1 Oraanizational Chanae1
_
The inspector reviewed the licensee's decomissioning organizational chart and noted that it conformed with the NRC-approved decommissioning pla ;
.
.
.
,
-4- Health Physics 1.2.1 Pe"onnel Monitoring The licensee used vendor-supplied thermoluminescent (TLD) personnel dosimetry for all personnel involved in decomissioning activities. Pocket dosimeters were also used to supplement the TLD dosimeters. Personnel monitoring records for the period when decomissioning activities were performed had not been received from the vendor at the time of this inspection. However, the decomissioning contractor kept a log of each workers pocket dosimeter readings. Records indicated that the total dose received for all workers involved with decomissioning activities was about 75 millire .2.2 Radiation Surveying, Sampling, and Monitoring The inspector reviewed the draft final report which contained the results of the decomissioning contractor's final radiological survey. The final radiological survey commenced on October 31, 1992, and was completed on November 7, 1992. The inspector noted that surveys activities were conducted following the format in NUREG/CR5849, " Manual for Conducting Radiological Surveys in Support of License Termination."
The inspector performed radiation surveys of the nuclear reactor facility to verify independently the radiological status of the area at the time of this ins)ection. The radiological scrveys performed included direct measurements of 3 eta and gamma radiation level The reactor vessel concrete monolith was being demolished during this i
inspection. The demolition was performed by using controlled blasting charges. Part of the upper tiers of the monolith had been demolished. The interior was scheduled to be blasted the afternoon of December 2, 1992. .The inspector was able to survey the interior of the monolith prior to *
demolishin The licensee indicated that the State of Kansas restricted landfills in the sine from receiving material with radiation levels that were above background. Therefore, the licensue stated that the concrete from the monolith that was at background levels would be disposed of in Kansas, but the concrete that was above the background level but below the levels comitted to by the licensee for termination of their NRC license, would have to be disposed of at an out-of-state landfil The_ inspector determined that contact general background direct gamma radiation levels associated with the facility were 12 to 15 micro Roentgen per hour (pR/hr) which were comparable to the licensee's final survey. The inspector surveyed selected areas on the inside and the outside of the concrete monolith and on the floors and walls of the reactor facility. A review of the final survey and results of the inspectors survey indicated areas on the wall next to the licensee's " hot lab" identified readings greater than 5 pR/hr above general area background at I meter. Discussions with the Radiation Safety Officer indicated that there were radioactive sources and radioactive waste in the " hot lab" which were responsible for-the increased ,
- , ~ - - - --,r--- --- ,wwr r -m, - , - , - , . , - - - - - - - - ~ ,. , ,, --, - ~ - .n,- -
.
.
.
-5-background reading The inspector surveyed the " hot lab" and confirmed that the increased radiation levels were the result of the radioactive sources and radioactive waste. Discussions with the Radiation Safety Officer indicated that, from an ALARA consideration, it would not have been prudent to have removed the radioactive sources and waste from the " hot lab" before the final survey. The inspector discussed with the Radiation Safety Officer the fact that the final report should include this fact and clearly indicate why the area of the wall by the " hot lab" was greater than 5 pR/hr. The inspector's survey at other areas did not identify any other radiation levels that were greater than 5 pR/hr above background at 1 meter. No areas were identified that were above the background levels for fixed beta radiatio .2.3 Radiological Monitoring Instrumentation Calibration The contractor contracted with a radiation survey instrument vendor to calibrate the survey instruments used for decommissioning surveys. The inspector verified through records review that instruments were properly calibrated and that the contractor performed the appropriate quality control checks on the instruments as stated in the licensee's decommissioning pla .2.4 Posting The inspector verified that notices to workers were )roperly posted in a sufficient number of places to permit employees to caserve the . Instruction of Workers The inspector discussed with-the contractor the training course material presented to individuals who worked on decommissioning activities. The material was presented as part of an approximately 6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br /> radiation safety training session that the contractor provided to workers who performed decommissioning activities. The material adequately covered the topics required by 10 CFR 19.1 .2.6 Radioactive Waste Shipments On November 3,1992, the licensee shipped radioactive waste resulting from decommissioning activities to a low-level waste repository. The inspector ,
reviewed the shipping documents and noted that the documents and the shipment had been conducted in accordance with applicable regulations. The shipment contained 447 cubic feet of radioactive waste which included graphite shielding blocks, the aluminum tank liner, concrete rubble, and other miscellaneous radioactive waste. The shipment contained about 13 millicuries of cobalt-60 and europium-15 .3 Committee. Audits and Reviews The inspector reviewed the audits of decommissioning activities performed by _
the executive engineer. The executive engineer's audit activities were a part of a weekly activities report prepared by the executive engineer for the licensee. The inspector noted that the audits and. weekly activity reports indicated that the licensee was informed of and reviewed all decommissioning
_ . - . _ . . _ _ _ . _ _ __ .___
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ ___ i
!
. *
-
>
-. ,
-6- (
.
activities. The audits were of good quality and reviewed appropriate activitie l
.
1.4 Conclusions
~l Proper personnel monitoring was used by employee '
Radiation and contamination surveys were properly performed and documente Calibration and quality control checks of radiation detection instrumentation i were performed at the required interval Areas were correctly poste Adequate 10 CFR 19.12 training was provided radiation worker Shipments of radioactive waste were performed properl .
Good audits of decommissioning activities were performe ,
e a
.
_
_
l
!
l IC 'v . - , . . .- , , _ , . .__ , , , _ __
I
.
.
,
ATTACHMENT 1 1 PERSONS CONTACTED Licensee Personnel
- B. S. Friesen, Radiation Safety Officer
- M. R. Lemon, Assistant Radiation Safety Officer Contract Personnel W. C. Gaul, Division Health Physicist, Chemical Waste Management, In D. F. liiggins, Radiation Control Supervisor, Chemical Waste Management, In * Denotes personnel that attended the exit meetin EXIT MEETING An exit meeting was conducted on December 2,1992. During this meeting, the inspector reviewed the scope and findings of the report. The licensee did not identify as proprietary, any information provided to, or reviewed by the inspector.