IR 05000184/1978004
| ML20148U198 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | National Bureau of Standards Reactor |
| Issue date: | 08/07/1978 |
| From: | Knapp P, Plumlee K NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20148U142 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-184-78-04, 50-184-78-4, NUDOCS 7812060316 | |
| Download: ML20148U198 (13) | |
Text
._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT Region I Report No. 50-184/78-04 Docket No. 50-184 License No.TR-5 Priority --
Category E Licensee- U. S. Department of Commerce National Bureau of Standards Washington, D. Facility Name: NBS Reactor Inspection at: Gaithersburg, Maryland Inspection conducted: July 6, 11 and:13, 1978 Inspectors: [ oat /,tL 7 A(! E. P'lut6 lee, Radiation Specialist date signed l
l date signed
/
date signed Approved byr 1 ' uvA w ,% o Q h7F P.M Kn' app, Chief,' Radiation Suddort dyteisigned Section, Fuel Facility & Material Safety Branch l
Inspection Summary:
Inspection on July 6, 11 and 13, 1978 (Report No. 50-184/78-04)
Areas Inspected: Routine, announced inspection of research reactor refueling, radiation protection program, and waste management including: fuel storage; fuel handling; neutron monitoring; procedures; posting of information; control of access to restricted, radiation and high radiation areas; control and monitoring of personnel exposures; portal monitoring; indoctrination and training of radiation workers; surveys; instrument calibrations; personnel exposure records; effluent records; waste shipping records; and spent fuel shipping records. Upon arrival, areas where work was being conducted were examined to review radiation safety control i procedures and practices. This inspection involved 20 hours2.314815e-4 days <br />0.00556 hours <br />3.306878e-5 weeks <br />7.61e-6 months <br /> on site by one NRC i i
inspecto Results: Of the 14 areas inspected no apparent items of noncompliance were identified in 13 areas. One apparent item of noncompliance was identified in one area (Infraction - fume hood airflow not maintained at value required by procedures -
Paragraph 3).
Region I Form 12 (Rev. April 77)
7 513060 31L,
- ~_. . .-. - - -
. .
DETAILS 1. Persons Contacted
- Dr. R. Carter, Director, Reactor Radiation Division
- Mr. P. Cassidy, Health Physicist Mr. R. Conway, Instrumentation Supervisor Mr. K. Eggert, Health Physicist Mr. F. Moore, Physical Sciences Technician Dr. A. Schwebel, Chief, NBS Health Physics Section
- Mr. J. Torrence, Deputy Chief, Reactor Operations Section
- denotes those present during the exit interview at 3:05 p.m. on July 13,197 . Licensee Action on Previously Identified Enforcement Items (Closed) Item of Noncompliance (184/78-01): Omission of monthly checks of emergency equipment air sampler Review indicated that scheduling of these checks was instituted and no further omissions have occurre (Closed) Inspector Followup Item (184/78-01): Reevaluation of self-absorption corrections for gross beta determinations of effluent samples. Review indicated that the licensee has reevaluated these corrections and concluded that no change is necessary to meet the requirement j (0 pen) Bulletin (78-08): Fuel transfer tube hazards. Observation of the licensee practices during fuel transfer tube operations did not identify any problems but the licensee's official reply to this
,
bulletin has not been reviewed. (Paragraph 6)
3. Signs and Posted Information Technical Specifications Section 7.4.d, " Procedures", requires that written procedures shall be provided and utilized for radiation and radioactive contamination control. Procedure H.P. 4.3, "H. P. Pro-cedures for Irradiation Experiments", in Section 8, specifies that the air flow is maintained at the face of the radioactive fume hoods at an average flow rate of approximately 100 ft/ min. and not less than 90 ft/ min.. The licensee posts signs on each hood giving the maximum allowable door opening (and other instructions).
_ _ _ _ _ __ __
. .
. .
.
Part of the inspection effort was to determine the availability of signs and posted instructions necessary for radiation protection and radioactive contamination control and to determine the workers adherence to these instruction On July 11,1978, at 3:00 p.m., the inspector observed that, contrary to a conspicuous sign indicating the maximum correct door height on each hood, the doors of two unattended radioactive fume hoods, numbers C001-1 and C001-2, were fully raised. The resulting face openings were about a foot greater in height than allowed by these '
signs and the face flow velocities were below the referenced required minimum of 90 ft/ mi Hoods C001-1 and C001-2 each contained contaminated receivers for samples irradiated in the reactor, using the pneumatic transfer (rabbit) system, and sample storage space containing radioactive material The licensee representative acknowledged that the face flow velo-cities as found were only about two-thirds of the required minimu He lowered the doors to the indicated maximum permissible height and demonstrated that the face flow velocities were restored to 100 ft/ mi '
The inspector identified the condition as found as an item of non-compliance. During the exit interview, the licensee representative 4 stated that the users would be reinstructed on hood operations and
'
that additional auditing of this item will be provide (78-04-01) Refueling Operations Part of the inspection effort was to review the licensee's com-pliance with procedures for the inspection, handling and loading of )
fuel during refuelin On July 6, 1978, the inspector observed the refueling operations, including the status of the ventilation system, reactor instruments and recorders, ventilation monitors, area radiation monitors, air samplers, surveys, personnel protective clothing, personnel monitor- .
ing equipment, portal monitors, and the control points for access I to various areas. The inspector also reviewed the adherence to ;
procedures and the record keeping during refuelin '
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified involving the refueling operations, i
!
L
. .
. .
5. New Fuel Storage and Handling The inspector observed the transfer of four new fuel elements from the new fuel storage facility to the assigned positions in the reactor core, including the preparation and inspection of each element for use in the reacto During these operations, the inspector noticed that although there were several vacant storage positions and the Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR) in subsection 7.2.1.7, "New Fuel Storage Facility" stated that the new fuel elements are stored in slots in numbered fuel rack positions, one fuel element was stored in a corner of the ;
new fuel storage facility instead of in a fuel rac The licensee representative stated that this is a special fuel ;
element that has been set aside and secured to preclude inadvertent I handling or use. He stated that an evaluation of this arrangement has been documented, but he requested a postponement of the review of this item until a more convenient time for reviewing those document The licensee representative stated that no additional fuel will be stored in the new fuel storage facility until this item is reviewed, and that no new fuel is on order or due to arriv The review of the licensee's documentation of this item will be done on a subsequent routine inspectio The inspectoe had no further questions on this item at this tim (78-04-02)
6. Spent Fuel Storage The inspector observed the transfer of four spent fuel elements, one at a time from the reactor through the transfer tube and the spent fuel storage pool to the assigned positions in the spent fuel storage rack The inspector also reviewed the record keeping and the radiation protection practices maintained during this operatio The inspector noticed that the applied protective coating on the pool walls and floor was discolored, except near stored fuel. The coating had flaked off at several points and appeared to be deteri-oratin . ._ _ _ .-
. .
.
The licensee representative stated that this was tentatively attri-buted to algae growth, and the control of algae was being reviewe He stated that the pool purification system was routinely operated to maintain the water purity. He stated that no pool leakage had '
occurred, s The licensee's disposition of this item will be reviewed on a sub- 2 sequent routine inspection. The inspector had no further questions on this item at this time. (78-04-03)
,
7. Surveillance Tests
, Part of the inspection effort was to observe the performance of selected surveillance tests being performed during this inspection, including the in place testing of HEPA filter systems. The inspector also reviewed the records of several surveillance tests that are required by the Technical Specifications (TS) including: confinement testing (TS 5.1), reactor shim and control rod testing (TS 5.4),
various engineered safety system tests (TS 5.5), primary coolant monitor tests and sampling (TS 5.6), emergency system surveillance (TS 5.7), and radiation monitor surveillance (TS 5.8).
The inspector noted that the licensee maintained a system of scheduling and auditing to assure the timely completion of surveillance test No overdue tests were identified by the inspecto .
No items of noncompliance were identifie . Personnel Monitoring Program External Exposures Part of the inspection effort was to observe the personnel monitoring practices and to review the exposure record Typically, more than 300 personnel dosimeter badges were issued during each badge period of 1977 and 1978 up to Jul Less than half of the badge exposures were taken to be reactor-related exposures and the remainder were accelerator-related or other exposure The licensee provided dosimeter badges to 418 individuals during 1977. Review of the licensee records indicated that during 1977, (and 1978, up to April), the maximum accumulated annual dose was 1,000 mrem to the whole body or 3,000 mrem to i the extremity of any individua ,
-,. n . - --- - - ,
. _ _ _ _ . .
. .
,
.
The inspector noted that 5 to 29 badges issued during each of ;
the badge periods from January, 1977 to April, 1978, indicated i detectible neutron exposures. Of these, from 2 to 14 were I reactor related and from 1 to 17 were non-reactor related !
during any one badge period. The maximum reported dose to any l individual during a single badge period was 98 millirems due to neutron The licensee did not accumulate the neutron dose information !
sepa ately from the gamma dose information. The inspector '
i estimated by scanning the records that the neutron dose totalled about 1/4 of the combined total and that the reactor related ,
. neutron dose totalled nearly 4,000 mrem during 1977, with no '
one individual receiving greater than a 500 mrem annual neutron dos The inspector noted that the licensee maintains several neutron survey instruments and performs routine and special surveys to determine personnel dose rates. Review of survey records indicated that the neutron dose rate was less than one mrem /hr during reactor operation, with the beamports closed. Observation of experimental equipment indicated that the neutron dose rate in occuppied areas was controlled by stacking shielding near the beamports and locating the experimenter in. shielded area The licensee conducts a spiked badge program, however, the individual responsible for this work was on annual leave and this information was not reviewed during this inspectio I The spiked badge information will be reviewed on a subsequent routine inspection. The inspector had no further questions on this item at'this tim (78-04-04) Internal Exposures ,
l The licensee performs urinalyses to monitor potential uptakes I of tritium and also performs whole body counts of all new employees. l In the event of any suspected potential ingestion of radioisotopes l that could be detected, the individual is recounted to determine I any uptak No items of noncompliance were identified by reviewing these record . . - _
.--
.
.
l Review of Radiation Protection Procedures i l
The inspector reviewed the licensee's radiation protection pro- !
cedures to determine the procedural compliance with regulatory i requirement The inspector noted that 10 CFR 20.103(f) imposed )
additional requirements effective December 29, 1977,- for the use of 1 respiratory protection factors but the licensee apparently had not 1 implemented such a respiratory protection progra j The licensee representative stated that it had not been necessary for anyone to take credit for respiratory protection factors since i December 29, 197 ]
During the exit interview, the licensee representative stated that the need for the use of respiratory protection factors will be ,
'
reviewe (Paragraph 17)
This item will be followed up on a subsequent routine inspectio The inspector had no further questions on this item at this tim (78-04-05)
10. ' Radiation'and Contamination Surveys and Air Sampling The inspector performed a beta-gamma radiation survey of the areas where work was being performed, to verify the licensee's recent surveys, and no problems were identifie The inspector observed the location and operation of air samplers and also reviewed the records of recent air samplin The inspector also reviewed the records of recent neutron surveys performed by the license ,
No items of noncompliance were identifie ,
1 Survey Instruments and Portal Monitors The inspector observed that the survey instruments, control point and portal-monitors appeared to be in operating condition and the licensee records indicated that the required instrument calibrations and checks were performe The inspector had no further questions on this ite ,
l
,-.
______. - - . . - - - .
.
.
,
12. Effluent Management Blowdown From the Secondary Cooling System Nominally 35_gpm drains from the secondary cooling system to a sump that is discharged to the sanitary sewer. No primary to secondary system leakage was indicated during 1977 and 1978 to the date of this inspectio Observation of the secondary coolant radiation monitor and a review of recent sample analyses did not identify any radioactive release No items of noncompliance were identifie Suspect and Contaminated Liquid Waste The licensee representative stated that all suspect and contaminated liquid waste, including the airconditioner condensate, is collected, typically by drainage to a holdup tank which is sampled and released to the sanitary sewer or held for other disposition if necessary. Heavy water spills are salvaged if fea si bl e.
~
The 1977 annual report stated that 45.4 millicuries of beta-gamma activity and 500 millicuries of tritium were released to the sewe Review of the licensee's liquid waste logbook entries and calculated values did not identify any discrepancies. No detectible alpha activity was release No items of noncompliance were identifie Gaseous Effluents The containment ventilation and any gases vented from the reactor primary systems exhaust through a system of HEPA and charcoal filters. Another potential atmospheric release route is through primary / secondary heat exchanger leakage to the secondary coolant, which circulates through cooling towers, however, the licensee representative stated that the heat exchanger is not leaking. The secondary coolant is routinely monitored and sampled to identify any release to this syste . . .
_ _ _ _ . _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ._ _
.
L . .
!
l 9-l l
(
The licensee's 1977 Annual Report indicated that 594 Ci of 41-
'
Ar and 195 Ci of tritium was released to the atmospher Review of the gaseous release logbook entries and calculated values did not identify any discrepancie The release rate for the first calendar quarter of 1978 was significantly greater than the average quarterly release rate for 1977, by 16% and 235% for 41-Ar and tritium, respectivel This stack release rate appeared to be less that 6% of the TS limit, which includes a stack dilution allowance of 1,00 ;
The second calendar quarter, 1978, determination had not been :
completed at the time of the inspectio The licensee representative stated that the tritium release rate would be reduced by maintenance directed to reduce primary system leakag No items of noncompliance were identifie . Radioactive Material Shipping Records General The licensee reported making 1,101 shipments of radioactive materials during 1977, not all of which involved the reacto Excluding radioactive waste, uranium and plutonium shipments ,
the major isotopes received and shipped were: 241-Am (4.2. Ci received, 6.8 Ci shipped), 99m-Tc (0.8 Ci received, 7.5 Ci shipped), tritium (2.1 Ci received, 2.1 Ci shipped), radiciodine isotopes (2.2 Ci received, 0.8 Ci shipped), and 99-Mo (1.9 Ci received, 0.3 Ci shipped). The total received during 1977 was 14.5 Ci and the total shipped was 19.8 C No items of noncompliance were identified by the review of these shipping record Solid Waste The licensee released 2.2 Ci of 144-Ce in 15 cu. ft. of waste, and 0.55 Ci of mixed isotopes in 580 cu. ft. of waste during 1977. There were records of six shipments during 1977, the most-recent shipment being in August, with no shipments during 197 I l
, ,
--ee m - _ _ _ _ . _ , _ _ _ - - - _ _ - - _ _ _ _ - - - _ . - - - - - - - _ _
. - . . ._ . . - . .. . - -
j
.. .
. . \
l
The licensee uses a' compactor to reduce the volume of wast The inspector reviewed the waste shipping records, and also toured >and surveyed the waste storace building. The highest-radiation level was 100 mr/hr at contact in the building, and 0.1 mr/hr outside the fenced are l No items of noncompliance were identifie Spent Fuel The inspector reviewed the records of spent fuel shipments during 1978 up to July. The records indicated that the licensee- ,
completed the procedures and the checklists for the shipping '
cask receipt, loading, and shipment. The licensee retained copies of the certificate of compliance for the shipping cas 'The mest'recent spent fuel shipment was indicated to contain 3 x 105 Ci of beta-gamma activit Review-of the shipping records did not identify any items of noncomplianc . Housekeeping Electrical Penetrations During tours of the facility, the inspector noticed that the sealant removed during electrical work in floor penetrations near the reactor console' appeared to be a flammable type of material. The licensee representative stated that the sealant had been covered with an asbestos sheet when it was originally installed. The licensee representative stated that a non-flammable grade of sealant would be used to close these penetrations, but no specific selection
'
had been made as ye l The licensee's disposition of this item will be reviewed on a subsequent routine inspectio (78-04-06)
15. Split Sample Analysis Comparison The results of an effluent sample split during a previous NRC inspection (NRC:I Inspection Report 50-184/78-01) indicated that one measurement was in agreement under the criteria used by the l Office of Inspection.and Enforcement for comparing measurements i (see Attachment 1) and one measurement was in disagreement. The j I
. - _ . _ . - _ . ,
_
- - - . -- _ - . . . . . - . -
i
. .
,
. .
11 1
l measurement in disagreement was'a tritium measuremen The inspector noted the licensee's tritium value was higher than the NRC value l aritherefore, was in a conservative direction and would not result .
in the licensee exceeding any effluent release limits. The inspector l stated that this area would be' reviewed during a subsequent inspectio (78-04-07) ,
,
16. Personnel Changes i Review indicated that the only change in the radiation protection organization for_ the NBSR during the past 14 months was the promotion of one technician to the position of' Health Physicist. A co-op student was working temporarily in this organization during the inspectio No items' of noncompliance were identifie . Exit Interview The inspector met with the licensee representatives (denoted in Paragraph 1) at the conclusion of the inspection. The inspector reviewed the scope and findings of the inspection, including the control of radioactive fume hood operations (Paragraph 3), the storage of fuel in the new fuel storage facility (Paragraph 5), and the respiratory protection program (Paragraph 9).
l l
l
l
.
l
,
.
TABLE 1
,
, NBS VERIFICATION TEST RESULTS
.
SAMPLE ISOTOPE NRC VALUE LICENSEE VALUE COMPARISON
RESULTS IN MICR0 CURIES PER MILLILITER Waste Tank H-3 (1.01 1 0.02) E-3 Disagreement (1.81 1 ?) E-3 1/12/78 gross beta- (4.2 1 0.2) E-6 (4.5 i ?) E-6 Agreement gamma
_ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ - _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _
_ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
-
,
.
Attachment i d
Criteria for Comparing Analytical Measurements .
This attachment provides criteria for comparing results of capability tests and verification measurements. The criteria are based on an empirical relationship which combines crior experience and the accuracy needs of this program.
In these criteria, the judgement limits are variable in relation to the comparison of the NRC Reference Laboratory's value to its associated uncertaint As that ratio, referred to in this program as " Resolution",
increases the acceptability of a licensee's measurement should be more selective. Conversely, poorer agreement must be considered acceptable as the resolution decrease LICENSEE VALUE RATIO = NRC REFERENCE VALUE
Possiole Possible Resolution Agreekent Agreement A Agreement B
<3 0.4 - .3 - No Comparison 4-7 .0 .5 0.3 - .6 - 1.66 .0 0.4 - .75 - 1.33 .66 0.5 - .80 - 1.25 0.75 - 1.33 0.6 - 1.66
>200 0.85 - 1.18 0.80 - 1.25 0.75 - 1.33
"A" criteria are applied to the following analyses:
Gamma Spectrometry where principal gamma energy used for identification is greater than 250 Ke Tritium analyses of liquid sample "B" criteria are applied to the following analyses:
Gamma Sper* ometry where principal gamma energy used for identification is less than 250 Ke S9Sr and 90Sr Determination Gross Beta where samples are counted on the same date using the same reference nuclid .