IR 05000375/1982001
| ML20053C627 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 05000375 |
| Issue date: | 05/07/1982 |
| From: | Hornor J, Zwetzig G NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20053C624 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-375-82-01, 50-375-82-1, NUDOCS 8206020401 | |
| Download: ML20053C627 (4) | |
Text
.
.
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION V
Report No.
50-375/82-01 Docket No.
50-375 License No.
R-ll8 Safeguards croup Licensee:
Rockwell International Corporation 8900 DeSoto Avenue Canoga Park, California 91304 Facility Narre:
L-85 Research Reactor Inspection at:
Canoga Park, California, and Field Laboratory, Santa Susana, California Inspection con 6)ted: April 26-27,1982
/M8b
[/7 !
Inspectors:
J V. 'Hornor, Reactor Inspector Date Signed
~~
V Date Signed Date Signed N 7, M?R Approved By:
G. h. ZMtzig,0 'ief, Reactor Projects Section 1 Da(f Si'gned Ch Reactor Operations Projects Branch Sumary:
Inspection on April 26-27,1982 (Report No. 50-375/82-01)
Areas Inspected:
Routine, announced inspection of facility status, organization, logs and records, review and audit activities, surveil-lances, radiation control, fire protection, physical security, and 3'
emergency response. The inspection involved 14 inspector-hours onsite by one NRC inspector.
Results: No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
,
RV Forr 719 (2)
i t
8206020401 820510 PDR ADOCK 05000375 G
. _ - -
_
.-..
.
.
.
.
.
_
.
.
~
. Details'
1.
P_ersons Contacted
- M. E. Remley, Director, Health, Safety and Radiation Services J. H. Walter, Santa Susana Site Manager R. Tuttle, Radiation Services V. A. Swanson, Engineer-in-Charge J. Moore, Radiation Analysis Engineer R. Garcia, Radiation Records Manager K. M. Hardman, Captain, Site Police and Fire Department
- Denotes those attending the exit meeting on April 27, 1982.
2.
Status of the L-85 Reactor Facility The L-85 Reactor Facility is shutdown awaiting NRR approval of an application for the authority to decommission, dismantle, and clear the facility area. The inspector reviewed the application for an Order to Authorize Dismantling of the Facility (dated March 10,1980) and two subsequent responses from NRR (April 30,'1980, and February 27, 1981).
The inspector determined from this review that the requirements for surveillance tests involving withdrawal of control or safety rods have been waived and no operation of the reactor can be accomplished without direct approval of NRR.
The facility License R-118 and all Senior Operator and Operator licenses have expired.
The Application for Dismantling was received in a timely manner and, except as noted above, all shutdown surveillances remain in effect until NRR approval to decommission is granted.
J The licensee representative stated that recent contact with a Department of Energy (D0E) representative indicated a favorable response with respect to transfer of fuel to DOE this year. After this transfer, NRR will consider final approval for decommissioning.
3.
Organization The facility organization remains as per the technical specifications (TS); however, except for performing required surveillances, personnel are on 15 minute call during working hours due to reassignment. During off hours, periodic security patrols and remote indicating instruments and alarms provide surveillance, with technical expertise on call.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
,
&
.
.
4.
Logs and Records The inspector examined all logs and reco-ds of the facility completed
'
since the previous inspection (September 1980), and verified that the facility had remained shutdown while all required surveillances, calibrations, monitoring, and maintenance required by the TS were completed at the recuired frequencies.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
5.
Review and Audit The inspector reviewed the minutes of the Nuclear Safeguards Review Panel
,
(NSRP) and determined that approximately 15 months had passed since its
'
last meeting.
While no tolerance allowance is stated in the facility technical specifications with regard to the interval during which the annual meeting must be held, application of the +25 percent usually applied to other facilities would place the NSRP near the limit of the window for holding its current annual meeting.
This matter was dis'ussed with the licensee's representative during and subsequent to the inspection.
Alt' hough noting that, since the reactor has not been operated for about two years, there was little for the NSRP to review, the licensee's representative agreed to promptly hold a meeting to review the activities which had been performed (primarily surveillance and monitoring) in order to satisfy the technical specification requirement. This matter will be reviewed at a subsequent inspectian.
,
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
6.
Surveillarce The inspector examined all surveillance check sheets for weekly, bi-weekly, monthly, quarterly, semi-annual, and annual surveillances for the period since the last inspection and confirmed compliance with the applicable l
TS requirements.
I
!
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
7.
Radiation Control l
The inspector observed that radiation control was provided by three area monitors, one remote readout area monitor, one continuous integrating particulate monitor and bi-monthly-smear, and direct radiation surveys.
All fixed instrumentation was equipped with audible ' alarms, was operating, and was within the current calibration interval.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
!
.
_
h
-
,
e
--
.y
<
,..e-o
--
i
.
-3-
.
.
8.
Independent Inspection The inspector examined the following items:
a.
The physical security of the reactor, the reactor building, and the surrounding area.
,
b.
The fire protection systems including remote detectors and automatic sprinkling system, c.
The emergency response control center where the remote radiation, fire detection, and security intrusion systems are monitored 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> per day.
The inspector found all systems operable, and within check or calibration frequency requirements.
The inspector intervie'wed the Captain of the combined site police and fire department.
The inspector concluded from this interview that all watchmen, police, and firemen were trained in health physics and emergency response. requirements for responding to either the remote or local alarms. 4 The technical support staff phone list was checked and found to be up-to-date and annual emergency response drills had been carried out.
The inspector examined the core vacuum monitoring system (liquid fuel leak detector) and confirmed that-it was operating and within its current calibration interval.
The inspector also examined airborne particulate monitoring results and personnel and area film badge records. All results were either background or within regulatory 1.mits.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
5.
Exit Meeting The inspector met with the licensee representative (denoted in paragraph 1)
on April 27, 1982.
The scope of the intpection and findings, as detailed in this inspection report, were discussed. The licensee representative agreed with the findings.
..,.-.
..
--
, _.