IR 05000186/1979003
| ML19241C035 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | University of Missouri-Columbia |
| Issue date: | 06/06/1979 |
| From: | Dubry N, Fisher W NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19241C031 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-186-79-03, 50-186-79-3, NUDOCS 7907260281 | |
| Download: ML19241C035 (9) | |
Text
.
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
REGION III
Report No. 050-186/79-03
Docket No. 50-186 License No. R-103 Licensee: University of Missouri Columbia, MO 65201 Facility Name:
Reaearch Reactor Facility Inspection At:
Research Reactor Site, Columbia, M0 Inspection Conducted. May 14-17, 1979 ke hug
.
Inspector: htN.E.$bry
[c!d-
'V1lk Approved By.
W. L. Fisher, Chief 6 [d /)7 Fuel Facility Projects and
'
Radiation Support Section Inspection Su:raary Inspection on May 14-17, 19 79 (Report No. 50-186/79-03)
Areas Inspected:
Routine, unannounced inspection of radiation protection and radwaste management programs, including: qualification; training; radiation protection procedures; instruments and equipment; audits; posting, labeling, and control; exposure control; surveys; notifications and reports; effluent releases; effluent control instrumentation; records of effluents; reactor coolant water quality; leak test records; byproduct materials records of receipt and transfer; previous items of noncompliance and commitments; and facility changes and codifications.
The inspection involved 27 inspector-hours on site by one NRC inspector.
Results: No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
7907260 7$/
G 466
?29
.
.
~
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted
- R.
Brugger, Director, Researma Reactor Facility
- P.
Keenan, Assistant to the Vice President-Research
- 0.
Olson, Manager, Reactor Health Physics
_
- N. Sunderland, Assistant Campus Radiation Safety Officer
- C.
Toepson, Chairman, Reactor Advisory Cot =ittee S. Morris, Reactor Radiochemist D. James, Senior Research Scientist G. Schlapper, Senior Research Scientist S. Stewart, H.P. Technician The inspector also interviewed other licensee employees, including facility researchers and licensed operators.
- Denotes those attending the exit interview.
2.
General This inspection, which began with visual observation of facilities which included equipment, posting. labeling, and access controls, the hot cell areas, the beam port floor, waste ta>k areas, the reactor control room, and laboratories in the reactor building, at 1:00 p.m. on May 14, 1979, was conducted to examine the routine operotional radiation protection and radwaste canagement programs.
During subsequent tours the inspector, using a licensee's survey meter, performed surveys at selected locations and found the levels comparable to those noted on the licensee's survey records. The inspector also attended a pre-shutdoen maintenance meeting in preparation for a refueling.
No items of noncompliance were noted.
3.
Previous Items of Noncompliance and Committents The following item of noncompliance, detailed in lE Report No. 78-01 and 78-05,was reviewed:
(Open)
The develop =ent of health physics proceduces.
(Paragraph 7)
The following licensee co==itments resulting from previous lE inspections were reviewed:
(0 pen)
The evaluation of the collection efficiency of the charcoal samples due to high flow rate.
The research project to determine the efficiency at various flow rates is continuing.
-2-466 230
.
.
(0 pen)
The calculation of the amount of tritium being released from the secondar systet to the sanitary sewer during blowdown c.
the secondary system.
(Paragraph 14b)
These matters were discussed at the exit in t e rview.
4.
Qualifications
+
Since the last radiation protection inspection, one full time health physics technician quit, reducing the number of f ull time technicians. The licensee's present program consists of the Manager, Reactor Health Physics, two full time technicians, and two part time laboratory assistants.
This shortage of manpower is of concern, because it appears that it is resulting in a deterioration of the licensee's health physics program (see paragraphs 5, 6, 7, 8b, and 14b).
In a telephone conversation on May 22, 1979, the Director, Research Reactor Facility, indicated that an additional health physics technician vould be employed within the next three months.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were noted.
5.
Licensee Audits and Reports The licensee's int ernal audit report, conducted by the Campus Radiation Safety Of fice in December 1978, was reviewed.
The internal audit identified a number of items needing corrective action.
A review of the corrective actions being taken appeared adequate, but because of the reduced health physics staf f a number of items still remain outstanding.
Minutes of the Reactor Advisory Co==ittee meetings held in December 19 78 and March 19 79, and of the Safety Subco==ittee meeting of March 1979 were reviewed.
The Health Physics monthly reports for January 1979 to April 1979 were also reviewed.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
6.
Trainin c The Manager, Reactor Health Physics, is providing radiation protection orientation to experimenters and other personnel new to the facility.
Documentation of those receiving training is provided on file cards.
Theoretical and practical health physics training is provided to new technicians by the Manager.
The weekly one-hour lecture topics for the health physics staff were reviewed.
- 3-466 2:1
.
The implementtilon of retraining lectures to separate work groups (e.g., operatori, reactor services, experimenters) has not been accomplished because Health Physics does not have the manpower available. 1/
No items of noncompliance or deviations were found.
7.
Procedures
&
In response to an item of noncompliance identified in IE Report No. 78-01, the licensee stated that eight procedures would be developed by August 31, 1979.
The item of noncompliance will remain open until these procedures are implemented.
Since the last radiation protection inspection (Decer'aer 1978) only the following three procedures have been written and approved:
HP-1 " Request for Radiation Safety Evaluation" HP-15 "Medi-Physics Hot Cell" HP-16 " Surveying Containers of Radioactive Material for Transport by Common Carrier" The procedures were reviewed by the inspector; no problems were noted. However, the importance of meeting the above cocaitment was discussed with the licensee representatives. Again the underlying problem seems to be the lack of available tire the Manager has to write procedures t ecause of understaffing. This matter was discussed at the exit int e rview.
No items of noncompl4ance were noted.
8.
Exposure Control a.
Ext e rnal The vendor's film badge reports, which are equivalent to Form NRC-5, were reviewed from September 1978 to April 1979.
Badges are processed weekly for individuals working in the contain-ment and monthly for other employees.
The licensee also issues ring badges to reactor operators and experimenters working with the P-tube system.
The greatest whole body doses recorded for the fourth quarter of 1978, CY 1978, first quarter 1979, and CY 1979 to date were about 700 mrem, 2700 mrem, 1000 creo, and 1200 mrecs, respectively. The extremity exposures for the same periods of time were 2400 mrem, 6900 mrem, 1700 mrem, and 2200 mrems, respectively.
The licensee does not maintain Form NRC-4.
1/
IE Inspection Report No. 50-186/78-05.
-4-772 d,6 6 mJ-
.
.
b.
Inte rnal
-
The licensee conducted one thyroid scan since the previous radiation protection inspection.
Urine sa=ples collected from reactor operatcrs are analyzed routinely for tritium.
While reviewing the results of this sampling, the inspector noted that no analyses were performed in January, February, and Apri] 1979, and two of four sa=ples were missed for
-
December 19 78.
Further investigation revealed the samples had been drawn but the analyses had not been done.
The samples were processed during the inspection; no proble=s were noted.
Because of the personnel shortage, the health physics staff had been unable to ensure timely analyses.
This was discus. sed at the exit interview.
During a maintenance operation, one individual was exposed to airborne tritium.
Initial urinalysis results i:.dicated about 7.1 pCi/1.
Subsequent analysis results concurred with the expecte' elicination rate estimates.
No whole body counting is performed; how 2r, review of the licensee's continuous air monitors, daily tritium air samples, and smear survey records revealed no problems.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were found.
9.
Posting, Labeling, and Control During f acility tours, the inspector reviewed the licensee's cocpliance with the posting and labeling requirements of 10 CFR 19.11 and 10 CFR 20.203.
Nine radiation work permits (RWP's) issued from Deceuber 1978 through May 1979 were reviewed.
RWP's are written for a limited number of jobs (e.g., handling resin, filter changes).
A standard operating procedure which will specify when an RWP is required has not been written. 2/
(Paragraph 7)
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
10.
Radi ; ton Surveys Selected direct radiation, swipes, and air sample survey records since the last inspection (December 1978) and the posted survey frequency check sheets were reviewed; no problems were found.
2/
IE Inspection Rpt No. 50-186/78-05.
-5-n73
-
4bb J
.
Daily tritium air samples taken in containment are independently analyzed by both the health physics and reactor radiochemist ry sections.
Results of both groups were compared; no major discrepancies were noted.
A review of the Decerber 1978 to May 1979 results revealed an average concentrat * 'n of 1.5 E-7 microcuries per cubic centimeter with one ma, pike of about 2.8 E-6 microcuries per cubic centimeter durir.g maintenance operation (paragraph 8b).
The spike was below the licensee's authorized technical specification.
- Particulate and gaseous continuous air monitors (CAM's) are located in containment on the beam port floor and the control room level. Audible alarms are sounded if alarm setpoints are exceeded.
The inspector re viewed the records for the sealr source leak checks done in March 1979.
No items of noncompliance or devictions wer+_ identified.
11.
Instruments and Equipment
, Portable Survey Instruments a.
Records of calibrations done since December 1979 were reviewed.
Instruments in service are calibrated at six month intervals by the licensee.
The licensee has been sending high range instruments to a co-tractor annually for calibration.
Due to the long turnarou nd time the licensee is starting to calibrate some of his high range instruments using a State CD facility, b.
Area Radiation Monitorine Systems (ARMS)
The system was calibrated in December 1978 and is checked for operability and alarm response before reactor startups.
A review of logs and startup checklists for December 19 78 to May 1979 found no problems.
c.
Stack Monitor System The particulate, gaseous, and iodine monitors were calibrated in February 1979, using sources traceable to NBS.
Records of the calibration were reviewed; no problems were found.
The isokinetic sampling probe was installed April 9,1979.5 No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified in these areas.
3/
IE Inspection Rpt No. 50-186/78-05.
- 6-
'TJ '4 466 r
)
12.
Primary Coolant Activity Records of primary coolant water sampling and analysis were reviewed for the period December 1978 through May 15, 1979.
The technical specification requirements for sampling frequency and maximum permissible I-131 concentration were met.
No items of nontemnitance were identified.
-
.
13.
Reactor Building Isolation Functional Testing During reactor startup checks the reactor bridge monitor, building exhaust plenum monitor, and backup building exhaust monitor are exposed to an external source and bui.1. ding ventilation isolation is verified.
Startup check sheets were reviewed for the period Dece=ter 1978 through May 15, 1979.
The building leak test records of April 22-23, 1979, were also reviewed by the inspector. Tritium concentrations in air which ranged from SE-9 to 7E-8 microcuries per milliliter were noted.
No proble=s were identified.
14.
Radwaste Manacement a.
Solid Radwaste There have been three shipments of solid waste in CY 1979 to date totaling about 81 mil 11 curies in 120 cubic feet of material to a licensed burial facility. A review of the records of these shipments found no problems.
The licensee has submitted a cask certification amendment to the Transportation Branch, USNRC, for spent fuel shipments. The licensee intends to ship spent fuel about June 1979.
Conversations with the licensee's representatives emphasized that an approved cask certification had to be in hand before such a shipment.
The inspector also reviewed a letter from a licensed facility stating they would accept the spent fuel.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
b.
Liquid Radwaste Records for liquid discharge to the sanitary sewer and to the atmosphere from the cooling tower were reviewed for the period December 1978 through April 1979.
During the period reviewed, there have been 18 discharges to the sanitary sewer, totaling about 0.08 curies (about 90% is tritium) and three discharges to the cooling tower basin, totaling about 0.05 curies of tritium.
(Liquids containing isotopes other than tritium are not discharged to the cooling tower basin.)
-7-bb 2b
The inspectpr discussed with the licensee his coccitment to calculate the amount of tritium being released from the secondary system to the sanitary sewer during blowdown of the secondary system. This commitment has not been addressed yet; the health physics staff has not been able to allot the time for calculations because of other duties.
This matter was discussed at the exit in t e rview.
"
c.
Gaseous Radwaste The concentration of Ar-41 per megawatt day is calculated based on results of grab samples.
The total amount released is obtained by multiplying the average concentration of Ar-40 per megawatt day by the megawatt days v.
operation.
During the period July 1,1979, through Febru ary 9,1979, approximately 1100 curies of Ai-41 was releasad.
The licensee also has a method to esticate the actual erncentration of Ar-41 being released at any time by using the Ar-41 stack monitor strip chart.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
15.
Materials The inspector reviewed the licensee's records of receipt and transfer of licensable byproduct material for the period of January 1979 through April 19 79.
The licensee appears to be satisfying the requirements of 10 CFR 30 and 10 CFR 71.
Fc r the period reviewed, there have been 303 shipments totaling about 80,000 curies of of f-campus users (89% as Mo-99) and forty-five shipments totaling 0.03 curies to campus users.
No itens of noncompliance or deviations were noted.
16.
Notifications and Reports A review of records and discussions with licensee representatives indicated that chere were no problets in the licensee's compliance with 10 CFR 19 and 10 CFR 20 requirements.
No items o' noncompliance or deviations were found.
17.
Facility Changes and Modifications During the inspection tours, the insper or observed modifications being done in the Medi-Physics hot cril area.
The inspector also reviewed the building addition, stetted in April 1979, which is being joined to the Research Reactor facility. Conversations-8-b 2b
.
i with the Manager' and records verified that radiation safety orientation had been held for the builders.
The mana?,er also indicated that after maintenance, clean-up, and some modifications the MURR hot cell will be returned to service.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were noted.
18.
Exit In te rview
,
The inspector met with licensee representatives (denoted in Paragraph 1) at the conclusion of the inspection on May 17, 1179.
The following matters were discussed:
The purpose and scope of the inspection.
a.
b.
The status of the previous commitments made by the licensee.
(Paragraphs 3, 7, and 14b)
The manpower demands on the health physics section which is c.
a conce rn because there is an indication of program deterioration. There appears to be insufficient time for continued training, program improvement, special projects, and routine work.
(See paragraphs 5, 6, 7, 8b, a-d 14b.)
The licensee acknowledged the inspector's co=ments.
The inspector contacted the licensee on May 22, 1979, concerning Health Physics staffing.
(Paragraph 4)
The licensee contacted the inspector on May 29, 1979, in f o rmin g him that a HP technician was hired and would start work on Junc 4, 1979.
-9-
466 237