IR 05000607/1999201

Insp Rept 50-607/99-201 on 990330-0401.No Violations Noted. Major Areas Inspected:Operations,Maint,Engineering & Plant Support

ML20195C667
Person / Time
Site:	University of California-Davis
Issue date:	06/03/1999
From:	NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned)
To:
Shared Package
ML20195C657	List: IR 05000607/1999201 ML20195C653
References
50-607-99-201, NUDOCS 9906080253
Download: ML20195C667 (14)

Text

,

.

.

.

U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION Docket No: 50-607 Report No: 50-607/99-201 Licensee: United States Air Force Facility: McClellan Nuclear Radiation Center l

Location: McClellan Air Force Base l Sacramento, California

( Dates: March 30 - April 1,1999

Inspector: Stephen W. Holmes, Reactor Inspector

!  !

Approved by: Ledyard B. MLrsh, Chief

Events Aedessment, Generic Communications and.

'

Non-Power Reactors Branch  !

Division of Regulatory improvement Programs Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation j l

l

!

'

9906080253 990603 PDR ADOCK 05000607 G pg

', $

er

-

m ,

$.. ,

.;_

.-

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

.

. .

L This routine, announced inspection consisted of the review of selected conditions and records since the last inspection, verification of corrective actions previously committed to by the licensee, and 'related discussions with licensee personnel. The inspection was conducted following the guidance of NRC Inspection Manua Onorations o 1 Staffing, reporting, and record keeping met requirements specified in Technical Specification e' The program for the control of experiments satisfied regulatory requirements and -

license commitment i

-. e ~ Reactor operations conformed to TS and licensee procedural requirements. No safety concems were identified 1

'

e Reactor fuel movements and inspections were made and documented in accordance with TS and facility procedures. No safety concerns were identified, e The material control and accountability program satisfied regulatory requirement ~ SNM possession and use limits were satisfie e Reactor and support facilities were operational as require * Facility procedures, operating records, logs, and document reviews satisfied TS requirements. Procedural compliance was acceptable, e- The requalification/ training program was up-to-date and acceptably maintaine Medical examinations were being completed as require e: Organizational and administrative controls remain consistent with TS and license requirements and commitment . .

!

o . Review, audit, and oversight functions required by TS were acceptably completed by the Nuclear Safety Committee. Meeting schedules satisfied TS requirements.

L e Licensee actions regarding the fuel element failure event were acceptable.

t

!

]

j i

e 4

'

,,

'o

'

}. ,

k l

..  ;

• I

.

.

L Maintenance e The program for surveillance and Limiting Conditions of Operation confirmations was l

being implemented in accordance with TS requirements. The use of an in-depth l computerized Preventative Maintenance System was noteworthy, e Reactor maintenance was performed in accordance with the reactor's license ;

conditions and TS requirements. Logs and records were acceptabl ,

Enoineerina e Design changes satisfied regulatory requirements Plant Suncort e The emergency plan was being effectively implemented. Facilities, equipment, and I resources were as described by the emergency plan. Drills and training were

, acceptably being conducted, and procedures and documentation were as required by-the emergency pla e A Non-cited Violation, 50-607/99-201-01 was opened and closed for the use of individual respiratory protection without a respiratory protection program as required l

. by 10 CFR 20.170 ;

!

l

!

l i

! I I

l s

9 %

e*

.L l O'

L

[:

c

'

-

,

.

t Report Details Summary of Plant Status

- Reactor operations were continuing with two shifts 18-hours a day. Activities included silicon doping irradiations, operator training, experimental irradiations, and Technical Specification (TS) inspections and surveillances. No safety concerns were note . DR.grations 01 Conduct of Operations 0 Reactor Staffino Scope (Inspection Procedure 39745)

The reactor staff qualifications, and operations logs and records were reviewe Also, shift turnovers for both shifts were observed, Observations and Findinos

. Operators included the Reactor Director (RD), the Operations Supervisor (OS), and more than ten Senior Reactor Operators (SRO) and Reactor Operators (RO). The reactor staff satisfied the training and experience required by the TS. Operation

~

logs and records confirmed that shift staffing met the duty and on-call personnel requirement Conclusions The research reactor operations staffing satisfied TS requirement .2 Control and Performance of Exneriments

. ' Scope (Inspection Procedure 69005)

Approved reactor experiments, and associated reactor logs, documentation, data,

! and Nuclear Safety Committee (NSC) minutes were reviewed. One experimental irradiation was observed. Discussions with facility staff were also conducted on experimental contro ;

i I

l

l ,

, *

,>

'

.

' v .

'

l.

<

.

.

.

2 Observations and Findinas The experiment had been pre-screened / reviewed and approved by the Experimental Review Board or was referred to the NSC as required. Review of the i experiment procedures and reactor log books, interviews with staff, and )

observation verified that experiment was constrained as required by the TS and I experiment authorization. The experiment was also installed, performed, and removed as outlined in the experiment authorization and procedures. The NSC

. review of experiments ensured evaluation for unreviewed safety questions or TS change !

! Conclusions Control and performance of experiments met TS and applicable requirement !

-0 Reactor Operations Scooe (Insoection Procedure 39745)

Reactor operations logs, fuel logs, and periodic checkout, start-up and shutdown .

checklists were reviewed. Start-up, steady state power operation, a shutdown, l and several facility checks and tests were observe Observations and Findinas Reactor operations were carried out following written procedures and T Information on operational status was recorded in log books and checklists as required by procedures and'TS Use of maintenance and repair logs satisfied pertinent requirements. Significant problems and events noted in the operations log were reported and quickly resolved as required by TS and administrative procedure Conclusigng Operational activities were consistent with applicable requirement .4 Fuel Handlina Scope (Insoection Procedure 60745)

Reactor operations and fuellogs, and periodic checkout, start-up and shutdown checklists were reviewed. Records of fuel movement related to the fuel failure event were inspecte '

. .

e*

j

'

a z - _

-

l

.

.

.

.

3-I Observations and Findinos l

l Procedures for lefueling, fuel shuffling, and TS required inspections /surveillances l

were extensive nd detailed, ensuring controlled operations. Fuel movement, inspection, log keeping, and recording followed the facility's procedurcs. Data recorded for fuel movement was clear and cross referenced in fuel and operations logs. Radiological controls and procedures conformed to health physics (HP)

ALARA principle Review of fuel movemerit to identify, remove and isolate the failed fuel elemen confirmed TS and procedural requirements were being followe t Conclusions i

Fuel handling activities and documentation were as required by TS and facility l procedures. No safety concerns were identifie .5 Materials Control and Accountability Insoection Scope (85102)

The inspector reviewed locations of nuclear material and accountability dccument Findinos and Observations The inventory of material was reviewed and verified. The material control and accountability program tracked locations and content of fuel under the research reactor license. Fuel burn-up and production was calculated using the REBUS 3 program produced by Argone National Laboratory West. The possession and use of special nuclear material (SNM) were limited to the locations and purposes authorized under the licens NRC licensees are required to submit material status reports (MSR) semiannually using a prescribed format including an NRC assigned Reporting identification Symbol (RIS). At the start of the inspection the facility, as a new licensee, had not yet been issued their RIS and therefore could not meet the time requirement for their first MSR. During the inspection the facility received their RIS and stated that they would submit the MSR as soon as practica Conclusions The licensee was in compliance with the possession and use limits of the research j reactor license, acceptably tracked burn-up and production of SNM, and had effective control of licensed material .

. s

..

o, p._. _

.

.

.

t

! -4-

!

02 Operational Status of Facilities and Equipment l- Scooe (Insoection Procedure 39745)

The inspector observed reactor equipment and the physical facility, Observations and Findinas Equipment was accessible with no extraneous clutter. All required equipment and facilities observed were operationa l i Conclusions Reactor and support facilities were operational as require Operations Procedures and Documentation j i Scope (Inspection Procedure 42745)

Operating procedures and updates, reactor operating records and logs, NSC i minutes were reviewed. Observations included the use of procedures during l operation I Observations and Findinas )

Written procedures required by the TS were available and used by the facility staff. Adherence to the prot.edures was acceptable. Procedures were routinely updated as needed. The reactor facility procedures had been reviewed and 1 approved by the NSC as required by T I Records of power level, operating periods, unusual events, calibration and )

maintenance procedures, installed experiments, and start-up and shutdown checks ,

were being kept. The facility's logs and records were clear, concise, and legible. '

The annual reactor operating reports, logs, and records acceptably documented

. reactor operations activities. Reactor operations and testing were documented as required by the T Scrams were identified in the logs and records, and were reported and resolved as required before the resumption of operations under the authorization of a SR Conclusions -  !

l-f

Facility operational procedures satisfied TS requirements. Reactor operating records and logs were being maintained as' required by TS. Significant problems

.

and events identified in the logs and records were reported and resolved as I requiredc

', .

t'

'

l<

. - -

_

E.

p ,

,.

i~

i - 5'- -l 05 . Operator Training and Qualification Program Scope (inanection Procedure 69003)

" The requalification program records, training records, SRO/RO operational hours

'

were reviewed.

i . .

i l . b'. , Observations and Findinas

" All operators and senior operators were participating in the ongoing training as

! , required by the requalification plan. Lectures were conducted and training given

!" for abnormal and emergency procedures as required. The lecture outline for the

'. reactor operator requalification program included appropriate subject material and a l

'

.

comprehensive written examination.- Training records contained the

' documentation required by the requalification program. Biennial medical exams

, had been completed as required.

l

,

e Operator hours were tracked to ensure that performance requirements were me Checklists were used for tracking requalification requirements and ensuring that L the plan elements were accomplished, i Conclusions

!

l The reactor operator requalification training program was being conducted and

'

Tdocumented following the requalification plan requisements. = Reactor operator requalification training records were being acceptably maintained. TS [

requirements were met. - )

j 06 -: . Organization and Administration ' I

, i l

' ' Scone (Inspection Procedure 39745) l L _The organization, staffing and administrative controls were reviewed, j l-  !

l- ' Observations and Findinas'  ;

e i l l L

'

< . As an Air Force. facility, the reactor licensee is the Commanding General, McClellan i Air Force Base.- Direct control is delegated to the Facility Director who reports back to the Commander for,all nuclear safety and. licensing issues. The Commander is~ advised by the NS ,

.

1 i

/- .

'

c., Conclusions l

Organizational and administrative controls were consistent with TS and othe ,

applicable requirements and commitment i

'

,

9 %

^

.,o i Li

• 3

.

,

.

,

-6-07 Quelity Assurance in Operations I Scoos (Insosction Procedure 40745)

The NSC minutes, annual reviews, audits, and reviews of changes, tests and

, experiments were reviewe Observations and Findinas-a NSC membership satisfied TS requirements and the Committee's procedural rule The NSC had meetings as required. Review of the minutes showed that the NSC provided guidance, direction, safety oversight, and ensured suitable use of the l reactor. The committee's reviews of the silicon flipping tool testing, Ar-41 l

. production experiment, and oversight during the failed fuel element occurrence I were comprehensive and demonstrated that the NSC was actively performing its dutie l Required audits of reactor facility activities and reviews of procedures, equipment changes, proposed tests or experiments, had been performed and documente Conclusions

= The NSC meeting frequency satisfied TS requirements. Audits were conducted as ;

I required. The NSC carried out its safety duties as obligated by pertinent )

requirements, TS, and administrative criteri l l

08 Miscellaneous Operations issues i 0 Fuel Element Leak ' Scoce (Insoection Procedure 60745)

i The inspector reviewed reactor logs, NSC minutes, facility procedures, maintenance logs and records, the Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR), as built drawings, and the 30 day occurrence report, and interviewed staf .

,

,

$

1  ;,

'

,.

-

, .

.:

.

d-7-

' b. Observations and Findinas On the evening of August 19,1998 the McClellan Nuclear Radiation Center (MNRC) reactor experienced a failed fuel element while increasing power to 2 megawatts. The facility shut down, secured ventilation, and notified appropriate agencies. Subsequently they inspected all fuel elements in the core, identified and isolated the leaking element, performed recovery operations to include venting of the reactor room, reloaded the core, and resumed' normal operations on September 12,1998. This event was a reportable occurrence as defined by the MNRC TS. The occurrence was documented as required in their report dated September 15,1998, " Subject: Reportable Occurrence: Failed Fuel Element Final 30-Day Report."

The conservative SAR calculations show that even under the most unfavorable conditions dose limits (10 CFR 20.1301) for individual members of the public would not be exceeded for a fuel leak in air. Upon initiation of the reactor room constant air monitor (CAM) the ventilation automatically went into recirculation mode, preventing release of radioactive material to the environment. Radioactive material, predominantly Xenon gas was restricted to the reactor room and the ventilation system. Controlled venting and purging of the reactor room air through the stack HEPA and charcoal filters released aproximately153 mci of Xe-133 gasses to the environment. Monitoring confirmed no particulates were released to the environment. The Xe-133 release was conservatively less than 1 percent of the constraint limits in 10 CFR 20.1101(d). The dose (calculated) to the highest exposed HP staff was 1.4 mre The inspector confirmed that the responses by the operators and staff were acceptable, procedures and TS were followed, and that the reactor was safely shut down as required. Notifications were made on time and followed procedures, TS, and applicable regulatory requirements. The inspector verified that subsequent inspection, identification and isolation of the leaking element, venting of the reactor room, recovery, and restart operations were acceptabl c. Conclusions Licensee actions regarding the event were acceptable.

I L ,

'. .

' e* .

.

-9

.

8-11. Maintenance

/ M1 Conduct of Maintenance M1.1 Surveillance and Limitina Conditions for Operation Scope (Insoection Procedure 6174 Selected surveillance records, data sheets and records of tests, procedures, reactor logs, checklists, and periodic reports were reviewed. Reactor operations and several periodic checks, tests, and verifications were observe Observations and Findinos Daily and other periodic checks, tests, and verifications for TS required limiting conditions for operations (LCO) were completed as required. Surveillance and LCO verifications were completed on schedule as required by TS and applicable procedures. All were within prescribed TS and procedure parameters and in close agreement with the previous surveillance result The computerized preventive maintenance system (PMS) was used to track surveillances, checks,'and inspections. This included the date last performed, date presently completed, information on where documented and by whom, overdue status, trends, full system historical records, etc. This provided clear and concise control of the reactor operational tests and surveillances. Use at the facility was comprehensive and timel Conclusions The facility's program for surveillances, LCO confirmations, and inspections satisfied TS requirements. The use of the in-depth PMS ensured that surveillance activities were completed in a most timely manner and prcvided extensive information of equipment condition and status for use by the facilit M2 Maintenance and Material Condition of Facilities and Equipment Scope (Insoection Procedure 39745) The maintenance and reactor logs, NSC minutes, and repair records were reviewed. Facility and equipment were observed during surveys, operations, and l' accompanied tour '. .

     ,,
     ,

L_ e E

g

'-
.
.

i

   . Observations and Findinos Routine / preventive maintenance was controlled and documented in the PMS and/or operations log. Unscheduled maintenance or repairs were reviewed to determine if they required a 50.59 evaluation. Verifications and operational systems checks were performed to ensure system operability before return to service. Trends were identified and problems resolved as require )

l Conclusions Maintenance logs, records, performance, and reviews satisfied TS and procedure requirement . Engineerina

.E1 Conduct of Engineering, Design Changes Scope (Insoection Procedure 40745)

The procedures, logs, records, and NSC files were reviewed. The change ! packages for the silicon flipping tool and cans, Ar-41 production, and a number of completed changes were reviewed, Observations and Findinos Changes were rigorously controlled requiring a facility staff review, a committee review, and were recorded and stored in individual change binders. Questions ; from the committee and replies from the reactor and HP staffs were documented ; and incorporated into the modification package The packages for the silicon flipping tool and cans, Ar-41 production, and a ; number of other projects were reviewed. The evaluations were far reaching with

, supporting documentation and information. NSC involvement was also  ;
'      ~

J comprehensive. Post installation verification testing of the systems was thoroug Procedure and drawing changes were included and were consistent with the observations.

l Conclusions Design changes were reviewed, approved, carried out, tested, and controlled as i required by TS, procedures, and pertinent requirement ', $ er 8 g

     '

L

'
.
.
.

m

   - 10 -

IV. Plant Support R1 Radiological Protection - Respiratory Protection Scoos (Insoection Procedure 83743) HP records, survey, and special work permits pertaining to the fuel failure were reviewed and involved staff interviewe ~ Observations and Findinas While reviewing the radiological records, the inspector noted that a special work permit specified respiratory protection for entry into the reactor room to obtain an air sample. Subsequently the inspector found that a protection factor for the respirator was used in calculating the dose to the technician who performed the entr CFR 20.1703 states in part that, if the licensee uses respiratory protection equipment to limit intakes pursuant to 20.1702, the licensee shall implement and maintain a respiratory protection program. At the time of this occurrence the MNRC had been licensed by the NRC for just about a month and did not have a respiratory protection program. Previously under their DOD/ Air Force license use of this respiratory protection equipment had been authorize The OS stated that at the time of the occurrence a few respirators were still on site and the HP who performed the entry wore one to be more comfortabl Calculations made by the licensee and confirmed by the inspector established that ! respiratory protection had not been needed for entry and made no practicable difference (less than half a percent) in HP's dose, j

All respirators have since been removed from the MNRC and training provided to the staff on regulatory requirements for use of respiratory protectio Conclusions This minor and licensee corrected violation is being treated as a Non-Cited Violation, consistent with Section Vll.B.1 of the NRC Enforcement Policy. (NCV 50-607/99-201-01 Use of individual respiratory protection without a respiratory protection program as required by 10 CFR 20.1703.) l P1 Conduct of Emergency Preparedness Activities and Staff Training Scope (Insoection Procedure 82745) The emergency plan (EP) procedures, and training and drill records for the reactor were reviewe '

     . .

e*

     '

, w .. I

,
   - 11 -

l b. Observations and Findinas l i The facility drills were incorporated into the McClellan Air Force Base-wide system ! and were conducted periodically as required. The exercises were conducted i according to, and fulfilled, the requirements stipulated in the EP. Items identified l by individual critiques were addressed, evaluated, and then incorporated when appropriat I Training records verified that acceptable training had been provided to in-house I staf : c. Conclusions  : The EP was effectively carried out as required. EP drills and training were acceptably being conducte l

      !

P2 Status of EP Facilities, Equipment, and Resources a. Scope (Insoection Procedure 82745) l

      '

The inventory records were reviewed, and EP facilities, equipment and supplies were compared to program requirement i b. Observations and Findinas i i Equipment and supplies were as required by the EP and _ inventory record Support facilities and communications were also as specified by EP requirement I c. Conclusions

      ,

EP facilities, equipment, and retources satisfied the plan requirement P3 EP Procedures and Documentation a. Scoce (Insoection Procedure 82745) EP documents and implementing procedures were reviewe b. .Qbservations and Findinas The procedures were current, approved and were readily available for use by

! response personnel. They acceptably addressed classification, notification, and protective actions required during an emergency to protect the health and safety of the public, implementing procedures were consistent with the EP requirement Emergency phone list and on-calllists were also readily available and up-to-date.

( ,

     . .

l j, I^ .

     .;.

*

r :- >

...
.

l.

I'

   -12-l c. Conclusions i

EP procedures and documentation were as required by EP and pertinent requirement V. Maneaement Meetinas X1 Exit Meeting Summary The inspection results were presented to members of facility management at the conclusion of the inspection on April 1,1999. Facility personnel acknowledged the findings presented.

I ! l l l l.

. , li , i l I l l l

      >
      )

(- .

     , $

j < l- ,.- i i ' k.; i. ,

w .,

.
,,
*

i i i PARTIAL LIST OF PERSONS CONTACTED I Lie.ensee H. Egbert . Maintenance Coordinator /RO B. Hassiett Contract Experiment coordinator i

*C. Hydel . Nuclear Operations and Maintenance Supervisor  i D. Newell Nuclear Engineer /SRO    l
*0. O'BRIEN McClellan AFB Nuclear Safety Manager
*W. Richards - Reactor Director    '

A. Weeks * . Training Coordinator /SRO - S. Walski HP I (* Attended Exit Meeting) , i INSPECTION PROCEDURE (IP) USED 39745 Class i Non-Power Reactors Organization and Operations and Maintenance Activities 40745- Class i Non-Power Reactor Review and Audit and Design Change Functions 42745 Class l Non-Power Reactor Procedures 60745 Class i Non-Power Reactor Fuel Movement 61745 Class i Non-Power Reactor Surveillance 69003 Class i Non-Power Reactor Operator Licenses, Requalification, and Medical ! Activities 69005' Class I Non-Power Reactor Experiments 82745 Class l Non-Power Reactor Emergency Preparedness 83743- Class i Non-Power Reactors Radiation Protection j 85102 Material Control and Accounting - Reactors ITEMS OPENED, CLOSED, AND DISCUSSED Opened i

~NON Closed
- NCV 50-607/99-201-01 Use of individual respiratory protection without a respiratory protection program as required by 10 CFR 20.170 PARTIAL LIST OF ACRONYMS USED CAM Constant Air Monitor  NSC Nuclear Safety Committee EP Emergency Plan   OS Operations Supervisor FSAR ' Final Safety Analysis Report  RIS Reporting Identification Symbol i

HP Health Physics RO Reactor Operator LCO Limiting Conditions for Operations SNM Special Nuclear Material i MNRC ' McClellan Nuclear Radiation Center SRO Senior Reactor Operator ' MSR Material Status Reports TS Technical Specifications

     '

NRC Nuclear Regulatory Commission , .

     ,. i k

}}