IR 05000151/1987001
| ML20206S293 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 05000356, University of Illinois |
| Issue date: | 04/16/1987 |
| From: | Greger L, Slawinski W NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20206S194 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-151-87-01, 50-151-87-1, 50-356-87-01, 50-356-87-1, NUDOCS 8704220369 | |
| Download: ML20206S293 (12) | |
Text
_-
_.--
. = _ - - -..
-
.
.- -
. _.
-
-._
--
-.
__.._
.
.
,
i -
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION III
Reports No. 50-151/87-001(DRSS);50-356/87-001(DRSS)
Docket Nos. 50-151; 50-356 License Nos. R-115; R-117
'
Licensee:
University of. Illinois 214 Nuclear Engineering Laboratory
,
i
-
Urbana, IL 61801 Facility Name:
Advanced TRIGA Reactor and Low Power Reactor Assembly (LOPRA)
Inspection At:
Urbana, Illinois
!
Inspection Conducted:
March 31 through April 2, 1987 ul
. U-I Inspector:
W.
Slawinski y//6 /17 Date
'
,
Approved By:
L. R. Grege ef 4'//M87 Facilities Radiation Protection Date I
Section
'
Inspection Summary l
Inspection on March 31 through April 2, 1987 (Reports No. 50-151/87-001(DRSS);
50-356/87-001(DR55))
Areas Inspected:
Routine, unannounced inspection of operations, radiation
.,
protection, and radwaste management programs, including:
records, logs, and i
j organization; review and audit functions; training; procedures; surveillance andmaintenance;instrumentsandequipment;exposurecontrol} material i
!
transfers; surveys; notifications and reports; gaseous, liqu d, and solid radwaste; and open inspection items.
A
Results:
No violations or deviations were identified.
!
l
,
)
]
i O
.
!
8704220369 870416 PDR ADOCK 05000151
PDR J
. - - -. -,,, - - - ~. -.., - - - ~., -,., - -, - + - -. - - - - - -
.-,.,.,.,.--.--~..--,--.#.c
-.e,-.
.-#, - - -. - -. ~,-
--,
,,,,.--.,%. -, - -.. ~
, - _.
.
.
_. - -
c
.
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted
- N. Barss, Reactor Health Physicist R. Brock, Senior Reactor Operator
- W. Dunn, University Health Physicist
- B. Jones, Ph.D., Acting Head, Department of Nuclear Engineering
- B. Micklich, Ph.D., Chairman, Nuclear Reactor Committee R. Peach, Senior Reactor Operator
+*C. Pohlod, Reactor Supervisor
- J. Williams, Ph.D., Director, Nuclear Reactor Laboratory
,
- Indicates those present at the exit interview.
+ Indicates those contacted by telephone on April 10 and 14, 1987.
2.
General This inspection, which began with visual observation of facilities and equipment, posting, labeling, and access controls at 4:00 p.m. on i
March 31, 1987, was conducted to examine the routine operational, L
radiation protection, and radwaste management programs.
The inspector
,
observed reactor startups and shutdowns and performed radiological
,
surveys of various areas; no discrepancies from posted readings were noted.
The general housekeeping of the facility was adequate.
3.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings (Closed) Violation (50-151/86001-02):
Operation of reactor with defective control rod position interlock.
The licensee responded to the
,
i violation in letter dated November 24, 1986.
Corrective actions to permanently repair a wiring defect were completed by the licensee on i
i September 10, 1986.
Also, the reactor manufacturer notified the appropriate NRC Regional Office of the apparent defect pursuant to 10 CFR 21.
This matter is considered closed.
J (Closed) Open Item (50-151/85001-02):
Records of semiannual power level measuring instrument calibrations not available for the latter part of 1984.
The inspector reviewed results of calibration of power channels for 1985 through 1986; no problems were noted.
This matter is considered closed.
(0 pen)OpenItem(50-151/86001-01):
Review organizational structure technical specification change request.
A technical specification change request concerning the reactor facility organizational structure was submitted to NRR in letter dated January 6, 1987; a revised request will
'
be submitted in April 1987.
This item remains open pending NRR resolution.
1
s v
. -..
- - -
.,..
-
-
-
-,.r--
,
- -. -
-.
,,..--nn
-
.
.
4.
Organization, Logs, and Records The facility organization was reviewed and verified to be consistent with the Technical Specifications and Safety Analysis Report (SAR).
The minimum staffing requirements were verified to be present during reactor operation and fuel handling or refueling operations.
The Nuclear Reactor Laboratory staff consists of a Director, three Senior Reactor Operators (one of the senior operators is the Reactor Operations Supervisor), one Reactor Operator, one Reactor Operator candidate in training, a Laboratory Assistant and a Health Physicist.
The current reactor health physicist was appointed to this position in February 1987, replacing another individual who is no longer employed at the University.
The current reactor health physicist (H-P) has a bachelors degree in a biological science, approximately three years related experience at a pre-operational nuclear power plant and approximately two years as an H-P in the University's campus Health Physics office.
The health physicist currently reports to the campus Health Physics office, which is independent of the reactor operations organization.
A proposed technical specification change request has the overall reactor facility under the cognizance of a Nuclear Engineering Department Head, and allows the H-P to report directly to the Head of the Department of Nuclear Engineering or to the campus Health Physics office in the event of safety or l
regulatory concerns.
The proposed technical specification organizational l
changes are pending NRR approval.
j Reactor operations logs and records were reviewed to verify that:
l a.
Records were available for inspection.
b.
Required entries were made.
(
c.
Significant problems or incidents were documented.
d.
The facility is being operated and maintained properly.
No violations or deviations were identified.
'
5.
Reviews and Audits l
The licensee's Nuclear Reactor Committee is responsible for oversight of l
reactor operations and assures the facility is operated in a manner consistent with the requirements of the facility license, applicable regulations and public safety.
The campus Health Physics Office has oversight of the radiation protection aspects of the reactor facility and informally reviews the reactor facility on a periodic basis.
Since the last routine inspection, Dr. Bradley Micklish was appointed as Chairman i
of the Nuclear Reactor Committee for the 1986-1988 term, replacing Dr. James Stubbins.
Dr. Micklich is an Assistant Professor of Nuclear Engineering and has previously been a member of this committee.
The Nuclear Reactor Committee is currently composed of five voting and two ex-officio members.
The members appear to possess adequate experience and balanced knowledge of reactor operations, safety, and radiation protection to ensure proper oversight of licensed activities.
l l
<
.
.
l
,
'
A review of Nuclear Reactor Committee meeting minutes for 1985 to present indicated the committee was meeting all regulatory requirements.
In late 1986, the committee began meeting on a monthly rather than quarterly basis; this practice is expected to continue.
The licensee's review and audit program was examined by the inspector to verify that:
a.
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.
b.
The review committee is composed of qualified members and that quorum requirements and frequency of meetings had been met.
c.
Required safety audits had been conducted in accordance with
,
'
Technical Specification requirements and that any identified problems were resolved.
No violations or deviations were identified.
6.
Training All members of the reactor staff have received both radiation protection training and 10 CFR 19.12 training as part of their licensing process.
Other workers and experimenters at the facility receive training required
l by 10 CFR 19.12 from the reactor health physicist and formal University
"
courses.
10 CFR 19.12 training is documented by the Reactor Supervisor or the reactor health physicist.
Only personnel authorized by the Nuclear Reactor Committee are allowed to use byproduct material and the reactor facilities.
The inspector reviewed procedures, logs and training records to verify
that the operator requalification training program is conducted in conformance with the licensee's approved plan, dated January 10, 1975, and NRC regulations.
The Reactor Supervisor is responsible for supervising the requalification program which includes the following:
a.
Annual evaluation of operator performance by the Reactor Supervisor (oral exam).
b.
Six lecture or discussion periods each year.
c.
Annual written examination to all licensed operators (questions similar to those on an NRC exam).
One senior reactor operator candidate successfully completed an NRC examination in January 1986.
The inspector reviewed 1986 documentation for annual evaluations of operator performance, individual operation i
times including type of operation, and requalification examinations administered to two operators; no problems were identified.
No violations or deviations were identified.
4
.
-
-
-
.
.
7.
Procedures 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 SAR requirements.
This review also verified:
a.
That procedure content was adequate to safely operate, refuel and maintain the facility.
b.
That responsibilities were defined.
c.
That required checklists and forms were used.
The inspector determined that the required procedures were available and the contents of the procedures were adequate.
The inspector also l
accompanied an operator and the health physicist during the performance
'
of their respective daily checklists.
The inspector noted the daily operations check procedure, last revised in 1975, contained undated, l
unsigned or initialed penciled-in changes.
The changes were primarily l
editorial but were noted to include some value/ parameter revisions.
The l
licensee stated the changes corrected typographical errors, clarified l
ambiguous portions of the procedure and reflected current facility parameters.
These changes were reported to have been made by or with the approval of the Reactor Supervisor.
The licensee reported that old l
procedures which do not adequately reflect the current facility and its I
operation are in the initial process of being revised; significant procedural changes will continue to be reviewed and approved by the Nuclear Reactor Committee.
This matter was discussed during the exit
.'
interview and will be reviewed further during a future inspection.
(50-151/87001-01).
8.
Surveillance The inspector reviewed procedures, surveillance test schedules and test records and discussed the surveillance program with responsible personnel to verify:
l a.
That when necessary, procedures were available and adequate to perform tests.
i i
b.
That tests were completed within the Technical Specification l
required time schedule.
c.
Test records were available and test results were within Technical Specification limits.
Records of surveillance / test results for the LOPRA and TRIGA reactors
'
were reviewed for 1986 to date and included the following:
i Channel checks of safety system, fuel element and power level i
measuring channels.
,
l l
l
l
.
.
Calibrations of power level moaitoring and measuring channels and
temperature measuring channels.
Emergency Core Cooling System capability checks.
- Coolant conductivity determinations.
- Fuel and control rod quality controls including system maintenance.
- The licensee's surveillance program appeared to be satisfactory.
The licensee reported that an estimated 480 hours0.00556 days <br />0.133 hours <br />7.936508e-4 weeks <br />1.8264e-4 months <br /> were spent on maintenance related activities in 1986.
Some of the significant maintenance activities are summarized below:
The position indicators for all four controls rods were overhauled
and included drive belt replacement, lubrication, and electronic parameter inspections.
Both cooling towers were overhauled.
- An additional four unit radiation monitoring system was added.
(Section 10(b)).
The wiring on a control rod position interlock was modified to allow
the interlock to function as intended.
The compensated ion chamber for the Log-N Channel was replaced.
- These repairs and modifications indicate that licensee management is concerned with maintaining the facility in a manner consistent with regulatory requirements and safety.
No violations or deviations were identified.
9.
Experiments The inspector verified by reviewing experiment records and other reactor logs that:
I Experiments were conducted by authorized users using approved a.
procedures and under approved reactor conditions.
b.
New experiments or modifications to previously approved experiments were properly reviewed and approved in accordance with Technical Specifications.
Potential hazards or reactivity changes were identified in c.
experimental procedures.
.
.
The inspector reviewed the one new experiment approved in 1986.
This experiment involves placing, optical material tangent to the reactor core in the Thruport and subjecting it to neutron and gamma bombardment.
During and after each neutron pulse, a small optical laser is shined through the material and an evaluation of the materials optical properties is conducted.
The experiment was adequately reviewed by the Reactor Supervisor and Health Physicist and approved in writing by the Nuclear Reactor Committee.
No violations or deviations were identified.
10.
Instruments and Equipment a.
Portable Survey Instruments The licensee appears to have an adequate supply of appropriate survey instruments capable of measuring beta, gamma and neutron radiation.
Portable survey instruments are calibrated by the campus Health Physics Office as authorized by an NRC Material License.
Instruments are calibrated semiannually using a nominal-100 millicurie Ra-226 source or a 5 curie Pu-Be source, as appropriate.
Calibration records for 1986 to present were reviewed; no problems were noted.
However, certain high range instruments are normally calibrated to a limit of only 2 R/hr; these instruments are typically not used in radiation fields exceeding their maximum calibration points.
The inspector examined several instruments maintained in the reactor facility.
Each instrument was operable and had a current calibration sticker.
b.
Area Radiation Monitors The licensee currently has nine operable area radiation monitors, four were added and declared operable in May 1986.
Technical Specifications require a minimum of three operable monitors.
The new monitors are of solid state construction, each unit driven by a separate power supply.
The five older units are tube powered and use a common high voltage power supply.
The operability of each monitor is checked daily using internal check sources and alarm setpoints are verified weekly.
The performance of these checks were confirmed by a selective review of daily health physics checklists for 1986 to date.
Monitor calibrations were last performed in April 1986 using Ra-226 and Cs-137 standards.
The health physicist plans on repeating these in-situ calibrations on at least an annual basis.
c.
Air Particulate Monitor The reactor facility has two operable continuous air particulate monitors (CAMS), one near the reactor bridge and one in a mezzanine area near the ventilation filter bank intakes.
When the alarm setpoint (i.e., 5000 cpm) of the mezzanine area CAM is exceeded, the
-
.
.
facilities' ventilation exhaust is diverted thru charcoal filters prior to venting to the stack.
The alarm setpoint and air flow diversion is checked weekly by the health physicist by exposing the monitor to a Ra-226 check source.
A review of weekly health physics checklists for 1986 to date verified the above.
d.
Gaseous Effluent Monitor The facility has one gaseous effluent monitor, a thin-wall geiger tube, located in the exhaust duct downstream of the filter banks.
The gaseous effluent monitor was originally calibrated in the 1970's using a known amount of Ar-41 and a relationship of 1 E-9 pCi/cc of Ar-41 per count / minute above background was established; concurrently, the monitor's response was determined with a Ra-226 standard.
Since this original calibration, the monitor's response to the same Ra-226 source in a reproducible geometry has been determined on at least an annual basis.
In 1985, the geiger tube and connector in the alarm portion of the monitor was replaced; the reactor was not operated while the monitor was out of service.
The replacement geiger tube is identical to the old tube.
A high voltage plateau was determined for the replacement tube and it's single point response to the Ra-226 source was reported to be similar to the original tube.
Records reviewed for 1985 and 1986 indicate that the monitor's response to the source has varied less than 10% from the original determination.
However, no gas calibration was performed on the replacement geiger tube.
Current industry standards and good health physics practice recommend full calibrations be performed on new detectors prior to declaring them operational.
Subsequent checks should include linearity checks at several points to determine monitor response over ranges typically encountered.
The desirability of performing a gas calibration and subsequent linearity checks on the new geiger tube was discussed with the licensee.
This matter will be reviewed further during a future inspection.
(50-151/87001-02; 50-356/87001-02)
No violations or deviations were identified.
11.
Exposure Control a.
External Exposure The personnel monitoring services of Radiation Detection Company are utilized by the licensee on a monthly exchange basis.
All Nuclear Reactor Laboratory staff members are provided with whole body film badges capable of detecting beta, gamma, fast and thermal neutrons.
Single chip TLD extremity monitors (finger rings) are provided when the potential for extremity exposure exists.
The finger rings are used by the health physicist when removing samples from the reactor and by researchers handling irradiated samples.
Self reading dosimeters are provided to visitors, temporary workers, and other personnel as warranted.
i
.
. -
-
"
.
.
Self-reading dosimeters are checked on a semiannual basis for drift and response to a known cesium-137 radiation field.
Dosimeters exceeding 110% variance with the known radiation field or which exhibit greater than 2% full scale drift over 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> are discarded.
The vendor's dosimetry reports were selectively reviewed for the period January 1985 through February 1987 for permanent reactor facility workers and those researchers involved with the facility.
The highest whole body quarterly exposure recorded was less than 400 mrems; extremity exposures for the period were less than 5% of 10 CFR 20 quarterly limits.
b.
Internal Exposure The licensee has no routine bioassay program and relies on airborne particulate and gaseous effluent monitors and reactor pool water samples to define any problems.
Pool water samples are collected annually and analyzed for tritium content.
The.most recent tritium analysis of pool water was p/ml.erformed in August 1986 and showed a concentration of 4.8 E-5 pCi Based on this analysis and pool water usage for the year, this equates to approximately 0.2 millicuries of tritium released from evaporation of reactor tank water for 1986.
Approximately 0.8 millicuries was reported to be released in 1985.
The licensee does not have an approved (10 CFR 20.103) respiratory protection program but maintains half face respirators for emergency use.
One SCBA, currently inoperable, is also available.
No violations or deviations were identified.
12. Material Transfers Material irradiated in the reactor is transferred to both on and off campus users.
Irradiated samples are normally held at the Nuclear Reactor Laboratory to allow short-lived material to decay and surveyed (direct and smear) prior to releasing to users.
Samples for use in laboratories on the University campus are transferred to NRC Byproduct Material License No. 12-00330-05.
The licensee verifies off-campus users have a valid license pursuant to 10 CFR 30.41.
Records of all transfers are documented in the " Production and Delivery Log," which was selectively reviewed by the inspector from 1986 to date.
In addition, campus users receiving material are required to complete a " Radioactive Material Record Notification of Receipt" and forward the information to the campus Health Physics Office.
The University Radiation Safety Manual, last revised March 1983, outlines general radiation safety procedures for transferring and receiving licensed material, including disposal procedures.
No violations or deviations were idantified.
. -
-
-
-
-
.
.
13.
Surveys s
a.
Area Surveys The status of experimental and irradiation facilities is routinely checked as part of the Health ' Physics Daily Checklist.
Currently, monthly smears and direct-surveys are performed of various reactor building areas by the reactor H-P.
Special surveys are performed as needed to evaluate new or changing experiments; thermal column and beam port experiments are surveyed before and after any modifications.
The licensee relies on their area monitors for indications of unexpected radiation levels.
The inspector reviewed records of smear and direct surveys for 1986 to date.
Smears are taken of 25-35 locations within the reactor building and counted on the licensee's gas flow proportional counter.
No problems were noted.
b.
Air Samples The two continuous air particulate monitors (CAMS) also function as air samplers.
Filters are typically changed weekly and checked with a pancake probe linked to a G-M meter.
If abnormal airborne concentrations are indicated by the CAM or suspected by the licensee, filters are collected and analyzed more thoroughly.
The licensee did not report any abnormal spikes or trends in CAM data since the last inspection.
i No violations or deviations were identified.
14.
Notifications and Reports i
A review of records and discussions '<ith licensee representatives indicates that from 1985 to date in 1W7 there were no problems regarding compliance with 10 CFR 19 or 10 CFR 20 notification and reporting requirements.
The licensee's 1985 and 1986 annual reports, required by Technical Specifications, were reviewed; no problems were noted.
No violations or deviations were identified.
15.
Radwaste Management a.
Gaseous Radwaste Gaseous effluent releases are determined from the stack monitor's integrated ratemeter data.
Natural background counts and those due to reactor operation are subtracted from gross counts to yield net gaseous effluent counts, assumed to be exclusively from Ar-41.
Using the derived relationship 1 E-9 microcuries of Ar-41 per
g.+-
m
-
s-
-..
-
..m
-
.
_ _ _ _ _
.
.
count / minute above background and the known flow through the system, the concentration of Ar-41 released is determined.
The licensee calculated that 665 millicuries and 1154 millicuries of Ar-41 were released in 1985 and 1986, respectively.
This corresponds to yearly average concentrations of 2.2 E-8 pCi/ml in 1985 and 3.3 E-8 pCi/ml in 1986, both less than 2% of the Technical Specification limit.
b.
Liquid Radwaste Potentially contaminated water is collected in a 500 gallon retention tank where it is recirculated and sampled before release to the sanitary sewer.
To calculate the activity, a 100 to 200-milliliter sample is evaporated and counted on the licensee's proportional counter.
In 1986, there were seven liquid releases totaling about 0.35 pCi in 2350 gallons.
In 1985, the licensee reported that less than 0.2 pCi were released to the sanitary sewer.
Liquid samples are not analyzed for tritium; however, conservatively assuming that all liquid releases had the same tritium concentration as the pool water samples, approximately 0.4 millicuries of tritium would have been released to the sanitary sewer system in 1986.
c.
Solid Radwaste Solid short-lived radwaste, primarily gloves, filter papers and other miscellaneous paper waste is held for decay, segregated and surveyed with an appropriate low-level survey instrument prior to disposal to the normal " cold" trash; records of such disposals were reviewed for 1986 to date in 1987.
Longer lived waste, including Co-60 resins, is transferred to the University's Byproduct Material License No. 12-00330-05 for storage and eventual shipment to a licensed disposal agency.
In January 1987, the reactor facility transferred approximately seven years accumulation of spent resins to the University's Dynamics Testing Lab, an authorized waste storage location under the campus Byproduct Material License.
The cumulative resin activity was reported to be only about 3 millicuries and contained in one 55 gallon drum.
No off-campus waste shipments have been made in the last several years.
No violations or deviations were identified.
16.
Exit Interview The inspector met with the licensee representatives (denoted in Section 1) at the conclusion of the inspection on April 2, 1987 and summarized the scope and findings of the inspection.
The inspector also discussed the likely informational content of the inspection report with regard to documents or processes reviewed during the inspection.
The licensee did not identify any documents or processes as proprietary.
In response to certain matters discussed by the inspector, the licensee:
. -
.
-
_
-
. - -
-. -
.
,
Acknowledged the inspector's remark concerning certain' outdated
~
a.
procedures, changes made to them, and the desirability to revise procedures to reflect current conditions (Section 7).
i b.
Acknowledged the inspector's concern regarding performance of a gas j-calibration on the new geiger tube in the gaseous effluent monitor
'(Section 10(d)).
I
2
3
,)
i
!
!
s i
.
k i
a a
i
-
-
.
-. -
-
- - - -
.
-
-
.
.
- - -
.
- -.
.
- -
. - -
- -