IR 05000156/1987001
| ML20236B179 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | University of Wisconsin, 07000134 |
| Issue date: | 10/19/1987 |
| From: | Greger L, Ridgway K NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20236B166 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-156-87-01, 50-156-87-1, 70-0134-87-01, 70-134-87-1, NUDOCS 8710230377 | |
| Download: ML20236B179 (9) | |
Text
1
!
,
,
i I
i U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
.f i
REGION III
i Reports No..50-156/87001(DRSS); 70-134/87001(DRSS)
j i
Docket Nos. 50-156;70-134 Licenses No R-74; No. SNM-116 j
Licensee:
University of Wisconsin l
Nuclear Engineering Department
Madison, WI 53705 l
Facility Name:
Nuclear Reactor Laboratory i
Inspection Conducted:
October 5-8, 1987
Inspector:
, R. Ridgw y
/O-/[-87 i
Date j
!
Approved By:
L. R.
re er, Chief
/O-/9-8~/
l l
Facilities Radiation Protection Date
'
Section Inspection Summary Inspection on October 5-8, 1987 (Reports No. 50-156/87001(DRSS);
i No. 70-134/87001(DRSS))
Areas Inspected:
Routine, unannounced inspection of records, logs, and l
organization; review and audit functions; requalification training; procedures;
!
surveillance and maintenance; fuel handling activities; radiation protection; l
radwaste management control; transportation activities; emergency planning; and J
followup actions relative to licensee event reports and open inspection items.
This inspection involved a total of 27 inspector-hours by one NRC inspector.
{
Results:
No violations or significant safety issues were identified in the i
areas inspected, i
!
l l
l;
,
-,
a I
l 8710230377 871020 I
PDR ADOCK 05000156
!
G PDR
1
__
. _ _ _ - -
1
.
l l
DETAILS l
!
,
1.
Persons Contacted
- R. J. Cashwell, Reactor Director
'
- S.~M. Matusewic, Supervisor Nuclear Reactor M. D. Rothenbuehler, Reactor Operator
!
K. J. Schrader,' Reactor Operator j
- Indicates those present at the exit interview.
I
!
2.
General I
This inspection, which began at 12:30 p.m. on October 5, 1987, was'
I conducted to examine the research reactor program at.the University of
~
Wisconsin. The facility was toured shortly after arrival. The inspector observed a reactor startup and sample processing during the inspection.
The general housekeeping of the facility remains excellent,:as was noted in the previous inspection (Inspection Repcrt No. 50-156/85003(DRP));
Operational activity at the reactor facility remains at about the same level as during the previous inspection.
The licensee had received the NRC show cause order to reduce the amount i
of High Enriched Fuel (HEU) onsite to that amount necessary to maintain a normal schedule of operations.
By February 1, 1986, all unirradiated fuel had been shipped to Department of Energy (00E) facilities at Idaho j
Falls.
3.
Organization, Logs and Records (40705)
The facility organization was reviewed and verified to be consistent with
!
the Technical Specifications and/or Safety Analysis Report (SAR). The minimum staffing requirements were verified to be present during reactor
,
and fuel handling operations.
j The reactor logs and records were reviewed to verify that a.
Records were available for inspection.
l i
b.
Required entries were made.
c.
Significant problems or incidents were documented.
-l
d.
The facility was being maintained properly.
..!
I Records were found to be complete and provided ade'quate-information in
-
'
L all areas.
l Since the last inspection, three Reactor Operators have received licenses, one Senior Operator terminated and two Operators are inactive.
,
The licensed organization now consists of three Senior and six Reactor
l Operators.
.I
'
J i
2
.j
l
-. _-_O
)
'
.
l I
No violations or deviations were identified.
4.
Review and Audits (40750)
The licensee's review and audit program records were examined by the inspector to verify that:
a.
Reviews of facility changes, operating and maintenance procedures,
-the design changes, and unreviewed experiments had been conducted by-the Reactor Safety Committee (RSC) as required by Technical Specifications.
.b.
That the RSC was composed of qualified members'and that quorum requirements and frequency of meetings had been met.
i c.
Required safety audits had been conducted in accordance with RSC l
Charter requirements and that any. identified problems were resolved.
A review of the semiannual RSC meeting minutes. indicated the committee I
had met all requirements.
Two members have been replaced since the l
last inspection; Professor S. W. Van Sciver placed W. G. Wolfer and i
l Professor R. W. Witt replaced Adel-Khalik.
'
l Monthly audits of facility records and conditions had been conducted by a member of the University Radiation Safety Office.
l No violations or deviations were identified.
5.
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 Regulations. Requalification examinations have been conducted annually as required and were of adequate depth. Experience records, quarterly performance evaluations and formal lectures were documented except the lecture program for 1987 which had not yet been completed.
No violations or deviations were identified.
6.
Procedures (40750)
The inspector reviewed the licensee's procedures to determine if procedures were issued, reviewed, changed or updated, and approved in l
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 clearly defined.
-
-
- -.
- - -.
-
_ - - - -
'
...
)
I t.
-
l l
c.
That required checklists and forms were used.
i The inspector determined-that the required procedures available at the control console had been reviewed annually and the procedure contents were adequate.
l The inspector reviewed four new procedures concerning radioactive
'
'
material shipments and receipts and a new modification checklist as follows:
UWNR 020 Modification Checklist UWNR 021 Quality Assurance for Shipping Radioactive Materials Jl i
UWNR 022 Radiological Materials Shipment UWNR 022A Swipe Test for Shipping Radioactive Materials UWNR 023 Receipt of Radioactive Materials t
UWNR 023A Swipe Test for Receipt of Radioactive Materials No violations or deviations were identified.
7.
Surveillance (40750)
!
)
'
The inspector reviewed procedures, surveillance test schedules and test records, and discussed the surveillance program with responsible personnel to verify:
a.
That, when necessary, procedures were available and adequate to perform tests.
b.
That tests were completed within the required time schedule.
.
c.
Test records were available.
Surveillance records since the last inspection indicated that all checks had been completed at the required frequencies.
On August 1, 1987, a steam line rupture in a campus steam tunnel damaged the cable carrying the annunciator signals from the reactor facility.to the University. police station.
The annunciator lines were out of service until. September 13, 1987, when repairs were completed.
During this
!
period.the campus police were requested to increase their surveillance of the facility during off shifts and on' weekends and holidays.
,
No violations or deviations were identified.
,
l l
l l
l l
_ _ _ - _ _
.
.
8.
Experiments (40750)
'
l The inspector verified by reviewing irradiation records and other reactor logs that:
)
a.
Experiments were conducted using approved procedures and under approved reactor conditions.
s b.
New experiments or changes in experiments were properly reviewed and approved.
c.
'The experiments did not involve an unreviewed safety question, i.e.,
10 CFR 50.59 requirements regarding experiments were met.
d.
Experiments involving potential hazards or reactivity changes were identified in procedures.
e.
Reactivity limits were not or could not have been exceeded during an experiment.
]
The inspector reviewed one experiment approved since the last inspection, the irradiation of gemstones.
Experiments, previously reviewed by the inspector had been conducted on the effects of fast neutrons on animal tissues.
No violations or deviations were identified.
9.
Fuel Handling (40750)
The facility fuel handling program, carried out during fuel and control rod inspections, 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 requirements. The inspector determined by records review and discussions with personnel that annual fuel examinations were carried out in conformance with the licensee's procedures.
No violations or deviations were identified.
' 10.
Transportation Activities (86740)
The inspector reviewed the shipping and receiving activities concerning radioactive materials for compliance with Department of Transportation
' regulations and 10 CFR Parts 20 and 71.
The inspection verified through observation, interviews, and records review that:
a.
Proper packaging was used, b.
Shipments were properly prepared, marked, labeled, surveyed, documented, and delivered to carriers.
___ - - -
'
.
l I
i c.
.That shipments were properly loaded, placarded and consignee's notified.
d.
That any receipts were surveyed and safeguarded, if required.
e.
That an approved Quality Assurance (QA) Program, when required, was in effect for all shipments, receipts, and container modifications.
-
In January 1986, the licensee made two shipments of excess HEU fuel to the DOE to satisfy the Commission's show cause order to reduce HEU onsite.
The licensee had received approval of their QA Plan for receiving and shipping radioactive materials prior to the shipments.
No violations or deviations were identified.
l 11.
Radiation Control (40750)
g The inspector reviewed the radiation protection activities since the last inspection. Records were reviewed, personnel were interviewed, and observations were made to verify that radiationccontrols were being i
carried out in accordance with license and NRC regulations. The areas l
. covered were:
a.
Posting and labeling of restricted areas and radioactive materials.
b.
Control of irradiated samples.
c.
Calibration of radiation detection instruments.
d.
Required periodic dose rate and contamination surveys, e.
Exposure records of personnel, f.
Posted areas of the facility.
g.
Personnel training.
h.
Source leakage testing.
A review of personal dosimetry records for 1986 and 1987 indicated no
,
problems. The maximum annual whole body exposure was 50 mrems and the S
highest extremity exposure was 2720 mrems.
Dose and contamination surveys had been conducted as required with no problems noted.
No violations or deviations were identified.
_-._
-_b
...
.
,
-
-
..
.
1
,
I
~
'
i'
512.
Radwaste Management (40750)
,
a.
Gaseous Radwaste.-
'
.;
LAccording to the licensee's. calculations, the average concentration'
-
of argon 41. released in-calendar year 1985-86 was-0.55E-6 microcuries
per milliliter, which corresponds to.approximately 0.23 percent of'
i ithe MPC' calculated in.the-SAR.
In 1986-87 the average concentration
!
.was 0.564E-6 or 0.24 percent of the MPC.
J b. -
Liquid Wastes
~Potentially contaminated water is collected and s.tored in a
~2000: gallon holdup tank where it.is sampled prior. tof release to the
,
sanitary sewer.!In.1985-86,-678 microcuries were released at an
'
average concentration of. -7.17E-5' microcuriesfperJmilliliter,.and on.
1986-87 1581. microcurie werefreleasedfat'an average conc.,of 4.71E-5-well below the limits of.10 CFR 20.303 without considering' dilution
.}
from~the sanitary sewer.
-l The licensee'also trac _ked pool liner leakage.(see' Paragraph.16b)-
j
~
~
-
showing the total volume lost in 1986-87 as'3577: gallons with a
'
total activity of 676'microcuries based.upon the assumed SAR maximumL concentration of SE-5'microcuries per milliliter. The estimated average activity concentration from pool. water analyses.was 1.5E-6.
which is predominately sodium-24 with a MPC of 2E-4 microcuries per
milliliter.
Therefore, the radiological impact is insignificant with
!
l a sodium-24' halflife of.15 hours1.736111e-4 days <br />0.00417 hours <br />2.480159e-5 weeks <br />5.7075e-6 months <br /> and a 55 year < travel t.ime to.the
.l
!
nearest well as stated in the SAR.
!
c.
Solid Wastes The licensee had transferred 38 cu ft, of solid waste containing 3.82 mci to the UW Radiation Safety' Department in November 1985 which was later shipped to V. S. Ecology, Richland, Washington on
.
December 9, 1985. The transfer and shipment were carried out under
,
the licensee's by product license and were not reviewed during j
,
l this inspection.
.
I-
-
No violations or deviations were identified.
13.
Emergency Planning (40750)
The inspector reviewed records and interviewed personnel t'o determine h
that the'-approved emergency plan was being carriedLout by verifying:
L a.
That procedures were in: place and required records were being kept.
~b.
That required drills were conducted and evaluated.
-c.
_That-required training had been conducted.
!
ii
_;
,
L
,
"'
m___________._.___
_________
_
l
..
I
~
-
The building evacuation drill was conducted on October 23, 1986.
The l
building was evacuated in a timely manner and the-drill was later
!
evaluated.
Drills are conducted semiannually and at least one of these includes a practice evacuation.
No violations or deviations wereLidentified.
14.
Review of Periodic and Special Reports (90713)
The inspector reviewed the following reports for' timeliness of submittal and adequacy of~information submitted:
Annual Operating Report for License R-74 to the NRC for: Fiscal Year
1985-1986 (Submitted August 19,1986) and for Fiscal Year 1986-1987 (Submitted August 12, 1987).
No violations or deviations were identified, f
15.
Licensee Action on Previous' Inspection Findings (Closed) Open Item 156/85003-01: Inadequate Records of Student Training.
The RSC had requested and received from the University Radiation Safety Committee an exemption for nuclear engineering students taking.the radiation safety training and examination as required in the UW Radiation Safety Regulations.
The exemption was granted since all NE students participate, as a part of their classwork, in' radiation safety
.l orientation and their class participation and completion records document j
this radiation safety training.
i 16.
Licensee Event Reports Followup
!
Through direct'observat' ions, discussion with licensee personnel, and l
review of records, the following event reports were reviewed to determine that deportability requirements were fulfilled, immediate corrective actions to prevent recurrence had been accomplished in accordance with technical specifications.
a.
(Closed) LER 86-01: Overdue SNM Shipment.
On February 6, 1986, the
licensee notified the Commission that a SNM shipment of low strategic significance had not arrived at its destination that day as scheduled.
The shipment was located by the carrier and delivered the next day.
b.
(0 pen) LER 86-02: On August 28, 1986, the licensee discovered a small
water leak (about 0.5 liters) from the lower thermal column liner.
i As a precaution, the reactor.was defueled on the same day and the
.I source of the leak investigated.
No' corrosion could be found during
'
a visual examination of the exposed 1/4 inch aluminum liner and welds.
At a later time the liner and welds under the thermal column,
which are not visible, were inspected with a TV camera.
Although no j
corrosion was observed, several welds are suspect because of the.
difficult weld position and multiple passes made in this area.
l
!
- j
)j
aj
a
.
The reactor was put back into operation after the leakage rate and -
!
radiological consequences were determined.to be insignificant (See i
Paragraph 12b).
Records of water additions are closely watched to detect j
'
any abnormal leak rate and the pool lev'el alarm is still in. operation with an annunciator in the University 24-hour police station.
The licensee is investigating methods to seal the leak which is suspected to be a small crack, since water loss rate depends upon.the ambient
- i temperature of the pool liner.and structural concrete.
If experiments with epoxy sealant show no water purity problems, an attempt to seal the crack may be made during the maintenance outage at years end.
This LER-will remain open until corrective measures have been taken.
,
17.
Exit Interview (30703)
l The inspector met with the licensee representatives (listed in Paragraph 1 i
.at the conclusion of the inspection on October 8, 1987 and summarized the scope and findings of the inspection.
The licensee acknowledged the inspector's remarks at the exit meeting and.did not identify any.
proprietary documents or processes, j
l I
l
!
L i
-
9'
c
>
'