IR 05000150/1985001
| ML20133M690 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Ohio State University |
| Issue date: | 09/13/1985 |
| From: | Ridgway K, Schweibinz E NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20133M663 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-150-85-01, 50-150-85-1, NUDOCS 8510280195 | |
| Download: ML20133M690 (9) | |
Text
,
-
.
, U.S. NUCl. EAR REGU' ATORY COPJ11SSION
REGION III
Report No. 50-150/85001(DRP)
Docket No. 50-150 License No. R-75 Licensee: Ohio State University Facility Name: Nuclear Reactor Laboratory Inspection Conducted: August 26-28, 1985 Inspector:
/d/b/bc[
K.R.Ridgwafytth 9//2 /Rf
'
Dat'e ApprovedE.By[:EndVR. Schweibinz,& Y#
Chief 8 -/1 -If Technical Support Staff Date Inspection Summary Inspection on August 26-28, 1985 (Report No. 50-150/85001(DRP))
Areas Inspected: Routine, unannounced inspection of records, logs, and organization; review and audit functions; requalification training; procedures; surveillance and maintenance; fuel handling activities; radiation protection; radwaste management control; transportation activities; emergency planning; and followup actions relative to previous violations and open inspection ite'as. This inspection involved a total of 24 inspector-hours by one NRC inspecto Results: One violation, failure to calibrate radiation instruments at the required frequency (Paragraph 8); and one deviation, failure on two occasions to follow approved procedures (Paragraph 4) we e identified in two of the eleven areas inspected. No significant safety issues were identified in the areas inspecte DR ADOCK 05 go
k
. . _ .. . . . - - . . _ _ _ _ . __ . _ _ . _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ . .
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . ___
I -
.
!
DETAILS Persons Contacted
- 7
- D. W. Miller, Director, Nuclear Reactor Laboratory
! *R. D. Myser, Associate Director, Operations l B. K. Hajek, Associate Director, Consultant J. Talnagi, Senior Research Associate l
- C. E. Jensen, Office of Radiation Safety I l
- W. E. Carey, Director, Office of Radiation Safety L l
j * Indicates those present at the exit interview.
>
- General
'
This inspection, which began at 8:30 AM on August 26, 1985, was conducted
- i to examine the research reactor program at the Ohio State University. The i l facility was toured shortly after arrival. The inspector observed a reactor j startup and a shutdown during the inspection. The general housekeeping of the facility has deteriorated since the previous inspection (Inspection i Report No. 50-150/84001(DRP)) with tools, equipment, and empty cartons spread about. This was discussed during the closecut meetir The refurbishing of both pool liners had been successfully completed in
>
November 1984 and the reactor reloaded. Operations were res;med in j Decembe I j On July 3,1985, the Reactor Operations Committee (ROC) had approved a
- revision to Chapter 2 of the Hazards Sunnary Report (HSR). ~he revision j had not yet been submitted to the Division of Licensing for revie . Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings
, (0 pen) Violation (150/84-01-01): Failure to calibrate instruments
- and radiation monitors on a quarterly schedule. During this f inspection, the licensee again missed quarterly calibrations of f one portable survey instrument and five pocket dosimeters j (Paragraph 8).
! (Closed) Violation (150/84-01-02): Failure to give annual requali-
- fication examinations on schedule. The licensee had corr;)leted the j 1985 requalification program on schedule.
- (Closed) Deviation (150/84-01-05)
- Failure of the ROC to meet quarterly. The ROC had met quarterly since the last inspection.
, (0 pen)OpenItem(150/84-01-03): ROC audit reports are not timely i
(Paragraph 5).
I (0 pen) Open Item (150/84-01-04): A more effective method of j
'
scheduling less frequent surveillances is needed. The licensee was again over due on two quarterly calibrations (Paragraph 8).
!
!
!
'
k '
i
~---,m,.,w,,.,mm,ow,v-w.e--,, n,m-~~v .~mr+.-ew,,.,.----.n-~n.-an,-nn , a w. . ~+, ~w.w_ -.-<m-..
. (0 pen) Open Item (150/81-01-03): Procedure AP-6, Procedure Writing and Approvals, does not address the new requirement of the ROC to review procedures nor does it establish the use of tenporary changes to procedures. The inspector noted that Procedure AP-6 had been revised to cover procedure changes but still did not address ROC review of procedure (0 pen) Open Item (15(/81-01-04): Procedures are out of date and in need of revision. The licensee has revised 10 procedures and generated 2 new procedures, but there continues to be a number of out-of-date procedures. Although the licensee is making progress in the area of procedure update, this continues to be an open item (Paragraph 7). Organization, Logs and Records (40750)
The facility organization was reviewed and verified to be consistent with the Technical Specifications and/or HSR. The minimum staffing requirements were verified to be present during reactor operation, and fuel handling or refueling operation The reactor logs and records were reviewed to verify that: Records were available for inspectio Required entries were mad Significant problems or incidents were documented, The facility was being maintained properl The inspector's review revealed that in general logs and records were complete and properly naintained; however, two instances were noted where procedures were not followed as required by the HSR. In two instances the logging of the installation and removal of the RY-4 Jumper with SRO approval was not completed on records of December 13-15, 1984 as required by Procedure IM-05, Use of the RY-4 Jumper. In another instance the SR0 notification of a high radioactive smear was not reccrded as required by Procedure RS-08, NRL Smear Survey. The above instances are considered a deviation from HSR commitments to follow written procedures (150/85001-01 DRP). Reviews and Audits (40750)
The licensee's review and audit program records were examined by the inspector to verify that: Reviews of facility changes, operating and maintenance procedures, design changes, and unreviewed experiments had been conducted by a safety review committee as required by Technical Specifications or HS . _ _ .. - -- - . ._
- - _ -_ -. . . - __, - . - - _
_ ._
'
! That the review committee and/or subcommittees were composed of qualified members and that quorum requirements and frequency of meetings had been me Required safety audits had been conducted in accordance with Technical Specification requirements and that any identified problems were resolve The revision to Chapter 2 of the HSR had, among other changes, required the ROC to review new procedures and had changed the semiannual audit frequency to an annual frequency. The 1984 audit of the NRL had been conducted in early 1985 and had not yet been documented. The chairman of the audit subcommittee stated that no significant findings had been discovered during the audit and all minor deficiencies had been reported and corrected as they were found. The previous untimeliness of audit reports is and will continue to be carried as a open item (150/84-01-03).
A review of the ROC meeting minutes indicated the committee was meeting
! all other requirement No violations or deviations were identifie . Requalification Training (40750)
The inspector reviewed procedures, logs, and training records; and interviewed personnel to verify that the requalification training program was being carried out in conformance with the facility's approved plan and NRC regulation Requalification training had been carried out and examinations conducted on March 4, 1985. One SR0 did not receive the training, take the examina-ticn, nor operate the the reactor for over four months as required by the approved plan and has been disqualified until the above itens are rectified and his requalification documented. Another Reactor Operator had not operated the reactor for over four months, but had been satis-factorily requalifie No violations or deviations were identifie . Procedures (40750)
The inspector reviewed the licensee's procedures to determine if procedures were issued, reviewed, changed or updated, and approved in
' accordance with Technical Specifications and HSR requirements. This review also verified: That procedure content was adequate to safely operate, refuel and maintain the facilit That responsibilities were clearly define l t' !
. _ - - _ . - _ _ _ _ - _ _ - - - . . _ _ .
. . . - - - _ . - _ - - _ - . . - . . _ . - . . _ . - . . _ - . - --
. _- . - _ - . .- . _- - - _, _ = _ _ . . . That required checklists and forms were use The licensee's Technical Specifications do not require written procedures; however, the newly revised HSR Chapter 2 requires that written procedures be available and followed for specified operations. Since the last inspection, the licensee had developed two new procedures and revised te The inspector noted that several orocedures still needed to be updated to bring them into agreement with the new emergency plan. Other procedures
'
needed to be updated to include the ROC review of procedures and packaging and shipping procedures needed to be modified to reflect new Department of
- Transportation and Chapter 10CFR71 changes. New procedures are also needed for controlling maintenance and facility changes. Because of these deficiencies, the Open Item (150/81-01-04) remains ope No violations or deviations were identifie . Surveillance (40750)
The inspector reviewed procedures, surveillance test schedules and test records and discussed the surveillance program with responsible personnel
,
to verify:
i That, when necessary, procedures were available and adequate to perform test That tests were completed within the required time schedul Test records were availabl The inspector noted that two quarterly calibrations were not carried out on the required frequency. The facility exit radiation survey instrument had been calibrated on July 14, 1984, December 13, 1984, and June 14, 1985 and five pocket dosimeters had been calibrated on April 5, 1985 and on August 23, 1985. In all three cases the quarterly calibrations required by Technical Specification 9.3 were exceede This is considered a violation of the specifications (150/85001-02[DRP])
and a repeat of Violation (150/84-01-01) and Open Item (150/84-0104)
concerning surveillance scheduling remains ope . Experiments (40750)
The inspector verified by reviewing experiment records and other reactor logs that:
i Experiments were conducted using approved procedures and under approved reactor condition New experiments or changes in experiments were properly reviewed j and approved.
, S'
.. -. - _ - . . - - - - - - , - -
._
-
. The experiment did not involve an unreviewed safety question, i.e.,
10 CFR 50.59 requirements regarding experiments were met, Experiments involving ;ciential hazards or reactivity changes were ideatified in procedure Reactivity limits were not or could not have been exceeded during an experiment. The inspector reviewed the one experiment approved since the last inspectio No violations or deviations were identifie . Fuel Handling (40750)
The facility fuel handling program was reviewed by the inspector. The review included the verification of approved procedures for fuel handling and their technical adequacy in the areas of radiation protection, criticality safety, Technical Specification and security plan requirement The inspector determined by records review and discussions with personnel that fuel handling operations were carried out in conformance of the licensee's procedure No violations or deviations were identifie . TransportationActivities(867401 The inspector reviewed records of radioactive material shipments made since the last inspection to determine that Department of Transportation (00T)
regulations were being followed in: The selection of the proper shipping container The preparation of packages for shippin The records of shipment The inspector reviewed two shipping records made since the last inspectio These shipments were of limited quantities. The inspector noted that Procedure RS-11, Routine Shipment of Radioactive Materials, and its checklist needed to be revised to agree with new Department of Transportation re[ulations (Paragraph 7).
j No violations or deviations were ide tifie . Radiation Control (40750)
The inspector reviewed the radiation protection activities since the last inspection. Records were reviewed, personnel were interviewed, and observations were made to verify that radiation controls were being carried out in accordance with license and NRC regulations. The areas covered were:
d
- u y.. 4pw.- , -. , . - - - --
y.- wr ---
e -+ -~-t'-=--wy 9---Y^ i----m--+----N *7+-
- _
.. _ . _ _ - - . _ .- . __ - . -
[ . Posting and labeling of restricted areas and radioactive material Control of irradiated sample Calibration of radiation detection instruments, Required periodic dose rate and contamination surveys, f Exposure records of personne Posted areas of the facility.
- Personnel trainin independent surveys.
<
i Pool water activit : Routine health physics coverage is provided by the NRL staff. A member of the OSU Office of Radiation Safety (0RS) staff conducts monthly
, surveys of the facility and audits the NRL staff activitie The highest whole-body exposure for 1984 was 490 mrem while all others were less than 50 mrem. The higher than normal exposure resulted from I the cleanup and painting of both pool In 1981 the NRL and ORS had drawn up an agreement dividing health physics responsibilities at the NRL. The responsibilities have been substantially modified since then, but the agreement document has never been updated to reflect the present activities of each organization. This is considered to be an open item (150/85001-03).
.
No violations or deviations were identifie . Radwaste Management (40750)
a. Gaseous Radwaste According to the licensee's calculations, which use kilowatt-hrs and building exhavst fan capacity, the average concentration of argon-41
?
'
released in calendar year 1984 was 2.21 microcuries per milliliter, which corresponds to approximately 5.5% of the Technical Specification limit.
I Liquid Wastes
Potentially contaminated water is ;r t.pu; s-ior to release to the sanitary sewer and ORS procedures permit the disposal of up to 40 microcuries/ day; however, in 1984 and to date in 1985 no releases have been made.
.
T
---,e- e- , n- -- 4-, - - -me--e, e-<n e,,w=,w--<-ww,,+ww.-- w ,w e m . , -w, -,-- , w y m, - , , ma,r,-,-,--, -w-,,p, w w w w-, -v,---w~m-,-v-.,,,e-,,,,w,
. - -. .- - -. - _. - - - - - _ _ _ . - _
l
-
? 1 i
'
i Solid Wastes
, Solid wastes are picked up by the ORS and transferred to the broad i
license for disposa No violations or deviations were identifie t 14. Emergency Planning (40750)
The inspector reviewed records and interviewed personnel to determine that the approved emergency plan was being carried out by verifying: That procedures were in place and required records were being kept.
i That required drills were conducted and evaluate That required training had been conducte The inspector noted that several procedures still needed to be modified to bring them into agreement with the new emergency plan, approved July 3, 1984. The licensee had started planning for the second annual emergency drill. This is considered to be an open item (150/85001-04[DRP]).
No violations or deviations were identifie . Exit Interview (30703)
i The inspector met with the licensee representatives (listed in paragraph 1)
at the conclusion of the inspection on August 28, 1985 and summarized the scope and findings of the inspection. The inspector also discus ed the likely in'ormational content of the inspection report with regard to documents or processes reviewed by the inspector during the inspection.
- The licensee did not identify any documents or processes as proprietar ;
The licensee acknowledged the following remarks by the inspectors at the
.
meeting and by telecon following the meeting:
- The violation for failure to conduct calibration of a radiation i
survey instrument and five pocket dosimeters on a quarterly
- frequency (Paragraph 8). The deviation from the HSR for failure in two cases to follow i
procedures, one in the use of the RY-4 Jumper and the other in the documentation of acknowledgement of high smear surveys (Paragraph 4). The five open items from previous inspections that have not been
corrected (Paragraph 3).
.
l The need to update the agreement between NRL and ORS for the division of responsibilities (Paragraph 12).
i i
d
_ - . _ _ _ ~ - . _ . _ _ . . . . _ . . _ . _ _ . _ . . ~ , . _ _ _ - . . . . _ , _ _ _ , , . _ , . , _ . _ , _ , , _ _ . ,
. . ,
e. The need for improved housekeeping and the control of radiation stickers, signs and symbols (Paragraph 2).
f. Several procedures need to be updated to bring them into agreement with the new emergency plan, l
l
l l
r
@
. .
,
'
-
9p,0 i
OCT 22 G85
-
Docket No. 50-409
- Dairyland Power Cooperative ATTN
- Mr. J. W. Taylor 3 General Manager 2615 East Avenue - South La Crosse, WI 54601 3 This refers to the routine safety inspections conducted by Messrs. D. Boyd and I. Villaiva of this office from June 18 through October 15, 1985, of activities 4 at the Lacrosse Boiling Water Reactor authorized by NRC Operating License No. DPR-45 and to the discussion of our findings with Messrs. J. Parkyn and
{ G. Boyd and other members of your staff during the course of the inspections.
i The enclosed copy of our inspection report identifies areas examined during
- the inspections. Within these areas, the inspections consisted of a selective l examination of procedures and representative records, observations, and interviews with personnel.
No violations of NRC requirements were identified ditring the course of the inspections.
,
a a In.accordance with 10 CFR 2.790 of the Commission's regulations, a copy of
.
this letter and the enclosed inspection report will be placed in the NRC's
! Public Document Roo We will gladly discuss any question you have concerning this inspectio *
I
Sincerely, l
" Original Signed by G. C. Wright" for-
'
j N. J. Chrissotimos. Chief Reactor Projects Branch 2 Enclosure: Inspection Report '
i No. 50-409/85012(DRP)
z i
cc w/ enclosure: t l J. Parkyn, Plant Superintendent DMB/ Document Control Desk (RIDS)
Resident Inspector, RIII 1 John J. Duffy, Chief
- Boiler Section
Ness Flores, Chairperson Wisconsin Public Service h02o177e51022 o DOCK 0 % $9 Commission
! Spark Burmaster, Coulee l Region Energy Coalition i II RI I RIII $ R I
- j 4 illalva h 0 ayette Q
Boyd (b issotimos t
g gO I
) 10/21/95 jo Q y leftT{6 hI