ML020080361
| ML020080361 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 05000083 |
| Issue date: | 02/27/2002 |
| From: | Madden P Operational Experience and Non-Power Reactors Branch |
| To: | Vernetson W Univ of Florida |
| Holmes S, NRC/NRR/DRIP/REXB, 415-8583 | |
| References | |
| IR-01-201 | |
| Download: ML020080361 (19) | |
See also: IR 05000083/2001201
Text
February 27, 2002
Dr. William G. Vernetson
Director of Nuclear Facilities
Department of Nuclear and
Radiological Engineering
P. O. Box 11830
University of Florida
Gainesville, FL 32611
SUBJECT: NRC INSPECTION REPORT NO. 50-83/2001-201
Dear Dr. Vernetson:
This letter refers to the inspection conducted on November 19-21, 2001, at the University of
Florida Test Reactor facility. The enclosed report presents the results of that inspection.
Various aspects of your reactor operations and security programs were inspected, including
selective examinations of procedures and representative records, interviews with personnel,
and observations of the facility.
Based on the results of this inspection, no safety concern or noncompliance with Nuclear
Regulatory Commission (NRC) requirements was identified. No response to this letter is
required.
In accordance with 10 CFR 2.790 of the NRCs Rules of Practice, a copy of this letter and its
enclosure will be available electronically for public inspection in the NRC Public Document
Room or from the Publicly Available Records (PARS) component of NRCs document system
(ADAMS). ADAMS is accessible from the NRC Web site at (the Public Electronic Reading
Room) http://www.nrc.gov/NRC/ADAMS/index.html. Should you have any questions
concerning this inspection, please contact Mr. Stephen Holmes at 301-415-8583.
Sincerely,
/RA/
Patrick M. Madden, Section Chief
Non-Power Reactors Section
Operating Reactor Improvements Program
Division of Regulatory Improvement Programs
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Docket No. 50-83
License No. R-130
Enclosure: NRC Inspection Report No. 50-83/2001-201
cc w/enclosure: Please see next page
University of Florida Docket No. 50-83
cc:
Mr. James S. Tulenko, Chairman
Nuclear Engineering Sciences
Department
University of Florida
202 Nuclear Sciences Center
Gainesville, FL 32611
Administrator
Department of Environmental Regulation
Power Plant Siting Section
State of Florida
2600 Blair Stone Road
Tallahassee, FL 32301
State Planning and Development
Clearinghouse
Office of Planning and Budgeting
Executive Office of the Governor
The Capitol Building
Tallahassee, FL 32301
Mary E. Clark, Chief
Office of Radiation Control
Department of Health
and Rehabilitative Services
1317 Winewood Boulevard
Tallahassee, FL 32999
Test, Research, and Training
Reactor Newsletter
University of Florida
202 Nuclear Sciences Center
Gainesville, FL 32611
February 27, 2002
Dr. William G. Vernetson
Director of Nuclear Facilities
Department of Nuclear and
Radiological Engineering
P. O. Box 11830
University of Florida
Gainesville, FL 32611
SUBJECT: NRC INSPECTION REPORT NO. 50-83/2001-201
Dear Dr. Vernetson:
This letter refers to the inspection conducted on November 19-21, 2001, at the University of
Florida Test Reactor facility. The enclosed report presents the results of that inspection.
Various aspects of your reactor operations and security programs were inspected, including
selective examinations of procedures and representative records, interviews with personnel,
and observations of the facility.
Based on the results of this inspection, no safety concern or noncompliance with Nuclear
Regulatory Commission (NRC) requirements was identified. No response to this letter is
required.
In accordance with 10 CFR 2.790 of the NRCs Rules of Practice, a copy of this letter and its
enclosure will be available electronically for public inspection in the NRC Public Document
Room or from the Publicly Available Records (PARS) component of NRCs document system
(ADAMS). ADAMS is accessible from the NRC Web site at (the Public Electronic Reading
Room) http://www.nrc.gov/NRC/ADAMS/index.html. Should you have any questions
concerning this inspection, please contact Mr. Stephen Holmes at 301-415-8583.
Sincerely,
/RA/
Patrick M. Madden, Section Chief
Non-Power Reactors Section
Operating Reactor Improvements Program
Division of Regulatory Improvement Programs
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Docket No. 50-83
License No. R-130
Enclosure: NRC Inspection Report No. 50-83/2001-201
cc w/enclosure: Please see next page
DISTRIBUTION:
PUBLIC RORP r/f TDragoun PDoyle WEresian PIsaac
SHolmes CBassett MMendonca FGillespie WBeckner EHylton
AAdams BDavis (Ltr.only O5-A4)
ACCESSION NO.: ML020080361 TEMPLATE #: NRR-106
- Please see previous concurrence
OFFICE RORP:LA RORP:RI RORP:SC
NAME *EHylton:rdr SHolmes PMadden
DATE 01/ 10 /2002 02/ 27 /2002 02/ 27 /2002
C = COVER E = COVER & ENCLOSURE N = NO COPY
OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION
Docket No: 50-83
Report No: 50-83/2001-201
Licensee: University of Florida
Facility: University of Florida Test Reactor
Location: University of Florida, Gainesville, FL
Dates: November 19-21, 2001
Inspector: Stephen W. Holmes, Reactor Inspector
Approved by: Patrick M. Madden, Section Chief
Non-Power Reactors Section
Operating Reactor Improvements Program
Division of Regulatory Improvement Programs
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
University of Florida
Report No: 50-83/2001-201
The primary focus of this routine, announced inspection was the on-site review of selected
activities at the University of Florida Test Reactor Facility. This facility is a 100 Kilowatt Class II
research reactor. The activities audited during this inspection included: organization and
staffing; review and audit functions; plant operations; procedures; maintenance and
surveillance; the safeguards and security program; the material control and accounting
program; and training.
Organizational and Staffing
! The operations organizational structure and functions were consistent with Technical
Specification Section 6.0, Administrative Controls.
Review and Audit Functions
! The Reactor Safety Review Subcommittee performed it's duties as required by the
operating license, Technical Specifications (TS), and administrative criteria. The review
and audit program satisfied TS requirements.
Plant Operations
! Reactor operations, shift turnover, and logs were acceptable.
! The control and performance of experiments were being performed in accordance with
procedural requirements.
! Fuel handling activities and documentation were in accordance with procedural and
Technical Specification requirements.
Procedures
! The procedural control and implementation program satisfied Technical Specification
requirements
Maintenance and Surveillance
! The licensee's program for surveillance and limiting conditions for operation satisfied
Technical Specification requirements.
! The maintenance program was being implemented as required by the licensees
procedures.
! The licensee's design change procedures were in place and were implemented as
required.
Security
! Security facilities, equipment, and procedures satisfied the Physical Protection Plan
requirements.
Material Control and Accountability
! The licensee was in compliance with the possession and use limits of the research reactor
license, acceptably tracked burn-up and production of special nuclear material, and had
effective control of licensed materials as required.
Training
! The requalification program was being implemented in a satisfactory manner and its
associated plan requirements were being met.
REPORT DETAILS
Summary of Plant Status
During the inspection the reactor was operated several days a week to support education,
operator training, surveillance, service work, and experiments.
1. Changes, Organization, and Staffing
a. Inspection Scope (Inspection Procedure (IP) 69001)
The inspector reviewed selected aspects of:
- organization and staffing
- qualifications
- management responsibilities
- administrative controls
b. Observations and Findings
The operations organizational structure had not functionally changed since the
last inspection (refer to NRC Inspection Report 50-83/2000-201). The operations
staff was comprised of reactor operators (RO) and senior reactor operators
(SRO) which includes the Reactor Director (DIR), and Reactor Manager (RM) and
two or more other licensed operators. Technical Specification (TS) Section 6.2.4
specifies that the training and qualification criteria contained in the American
National Standards Institute (ANSI) Standard 15.4, Standards for Selection and
Training of Personnel for Research Reactors, is required to be met by University
of Florida Test Reactor (UFTR) personnel. The inspector verified the education,
training, and experience of the operations staff in order to confirm that the reactor
staff met ANSI 15.4 requirements. Operation logs and records confirmed that
shift staffing routinely met the duty and on-call personnel requirements of TS Section 6.2.3. Staffing was as reported in the Annual Report and as required by
TS Section 6.2, Organization.
c. Conclusions
The operations organizational structure and functions were consistent with TS Section 6.0, Administrative Controls, amendment 22, dated December 3, 1997.
2. Review and Audit Functions
a. Inspection Scope (IP 69001)
The inspector reviewed selected aspects of:
- Reactor Safety Review Subcommittee (RSRS) minutes
- safety and audit records
- Special Power Excursion Reactor Test (SPERT) fuel shipment
- 1999 and 2000 annual audits and follow-ups
-2-
b. Observations and Findings
The RSRS committee met eleven times during the period from December 1999 to
October 2001. At least one meeting was held each quarter at intervals not to
exceed four months as required by TS Section 6.2.5 (2) Meetings (a). The
membership also satisfied the charter requirements in TS Section 6.2.5(2)(a),
Membership. Review of the minutes indicated that the committee provided
guidance and direction to ensure suitable oversight of reactor operations and that
the minutes provided a record of this safety oversight.
The RSRS committee minutes and audit records showed that safety reviews and
individual audits had been completed at the required frequency and submitted to
the Dean of the College of Engineering within three months of completion for the
functional areas specified by TS Section 6.2.5(4). The inspector noted that the
licensee took appropriate corrective actions for 1999 and 2000 calendar year
audit findings. Committee records also documented that procedure changes
were reviewed as required by TS Section 6.2.5(3) and licensee procedures.
The inspector reviewed the committees oversight of the SPERT fuel shipment
and associated changes to standard operating procedures A-4, D.6, O.4, and
O.5. The RSRS provided guidance to the reactor operations and Health Physics
(HP) staffs for the fuel shipment as required by TS Section 6.2.5(3) and the
ALARA (As Low As Reasonably Achievable) program.
c. Conclusions
Audits being conducted by the RSRS were found to be in accordance with the
requirements specified in TS Section 6.2.5, amendment 22, dated
December 3, 1997.
3. Plant Operations
a. Inspection Scope (IP 690001)
The inspector reviewed selected aspects of:
- operational logs and records
- staffing for operations
- selected operational, startup, or shutdown activities
- experimental program requirements
- experiment approval and operations procedures
- experiment logs and records
- approved reactor experiments
- RSRS minutes
- UFTR fuel handling procedures
- fuel handling equipment and instrumentation
- fuel handling and examination records
-3-
-4-
b. Observations and Findings
(1) Reactor Operations
The inspector reviewed 125 of the daily operations logs that were
recorded since December 1999. Additionally, the inspector observed a
reactor startup, shutdown, and two steady state operations, a
thermoluminescent device activation and a pneumatic system run.
Reactor operations were carried out in accordance with written
procedures as required by TS Section 6.3. Information on operational
status of the facility was recorded clearly and concisely in log books
and/or checklists as required by Facility Operating License No. R-56,
License Condition 2.C.2 and the Operating Documents Manual (ODM).
Scrams were identified in the logs and records, and were reported and
resolved as required before the resumption of operations. Inspector
observation of operator turnovers confirmed that oncoming staff was
briefed on the status of ongoing reactor, maintenance, and HP
operations. Operation logs and records confirmed that shift staffing met
the minimum requirements for duty and on-call personnel as required by
(2) Experiments
Experiments at the UFTR are categorized as Class I through Class IV
based on their potential hazard and need for review and approval.
Class l experiments may be approved by the RM while Class IV
experiments must be reviewed and approved by the RSRS and have
specific emergency operating instructions for conducting the
experiments.
No new experiments were approved since the last inspection. Review of
current experiment authorizations, procedures, and related reactor log
book entries plus observation of two activation runs, confirmed that
experiments were installed, performed, and removed as outlined in the
approved experiment authorizations.
(3) Fuel Handling
The inspector reviewed UFTR procedures for refueling and fuel
movement, as well as fuel logs and records against the requirements of
TS Section 3.7 and 5.8. Fuel movement, inspection, log keeping, and
data recording followed procedures and met TS Section 3.7 and 5.8
requirements. Data recorded for fuel movement was clear and cross
referenced in fuel and operations logs.
c. Conclusions
-5-
Based on the procedures and records reviewed and the observations made
during the inspection, the inspector determined that reactor operations, shift
turnover, and logs; the control and performance of experiments; and fuel handling
activities and its documentation were acceptable and in accordance with
procedural and TS requirements.
4. Procedures
a. Inspection Scope (IP 69001)
The inspector reviewed selected aspects of:
- administrative controls
- records for changes and temporary changes
- procedural implementation
- logs and records
b. Observations and Findings
Operational procedures were available for those tasks and items required by TS Section 6.3 and ODM Section A. The licensee controlled changes and temporary
changes to procedures, and associated review and approval processes by use of
administrative procedures ODM 0.1 and 0.5.
The inspector reviewed the ODM which contained the administrative and
operations procedures for the facility. The inspector individually reviewed new
procedures D.6 and D.7, and changes to A.1, A.2, D-6, O-4, O-5, Q-4, and Q-5.
The procedures were adequate to perform reactor and other operations which
they covered. The changes and the new procedures had been approved and
reviewed by the RSRS committee as required.
The inspector reviewed 2000 and 2001 document control training records and
interviewed the staff, and determined that the training of personnel on procedures
and subsequent changes to procedures was effective. The inspector observed
personnel performing startups, shutdowns, daily and weekly checks, installing
and removing experiments and operating the reactor while using applicable
procedures. The inspector determined that use of the procedures was
acceptable.
c. Conclusions
Based on the procedures and records reviewed and observations of staff during
the inspection, the inspector determined that the procedural control and
implementation program was acceptably maintained as required by the licensees
ODM.
5. Maintenance and Surveillance
-6-
a. Inspection Scope (IPs 69001, 39745, 61745, and 40745)
The inspector reviewed selected aspects of:
- maintenance procedures
- equipment maintenance records
- surveillance and calibration procedures
- surveillance, calibration, and test data sheets and records
- Reactor operations, periodic checks, tests, and verifications were
observed.
- facility design changes and records
- facility configuration
b. Observations and Findings
(1) Maintenance
The inspector reviewed the maintenance implementing procedure ODM
O.2 and the records related to 2000 and 2001 scheduled and
unscheduled preventative, corrective, and modification maintenance
activities. Additionally, the inspector performed an in-depth review of
maintenance activities O1-03-two pen recorder replacement, O1-06-
temperature monitor replacement, and 01-15-source alarm repair.
This review indicated that routine/preventive maintenance was controlled
and documented in the maintenance and/or operations log consistent
with the procedural requirements of ODM O.2 and O.3. Sign-offs by the
DIR, RM, SRO on duty, and the Radiation Control Officer were as
required by ODM O.2 and O.3. As required by ODM Form O.2A ,
operational systems checks were performed to ensure system functions
before returning them to service.
(2) Surveillance
A chart board was used to track surveillance checks, and inspections.
The information on the board included the date last performed, date due,
and surveillance description. This provided basic scheduling control
over the reactor operational tests and surveillance checks.
The inspector noted that the licensees chart board indicated that all TS
required surveillances and LCO verifications for 2000 and 2001 had
been performed as required by TS 4.0. The inspector performed an
in-depth review of the annual power calibration and rod drop time
surveillances. The inspector observed eighteen safety surveillances
incorporated into the daily checkout that provide control rod scram,
withdraw prevent, and interlock functions. The inspector also observed
nine weekly surveillances related to the reactor vent system, building
-7-
evacuation alarm, radiological safety, and reactor water system. These
reviews and observations indicated that daily and other periodic checks,
tests, and verifications for TS required LCOs were completed as
required. All those reviewed were within prescribed TS and procedure
parameters and in agreement with the previous surveillance results.
(3) Previous TS Violation
The licensee was issued a Level IV Violation on December 22, 2000, for
failure to submit their annual reports for reactor years 1997-1998, and
1998-1999 to the Commission within six (6) months following the end of
each prescribed year as required by TS Section 6.6.1.
The licensee replied by letter dated January 29, 2001, admitting the
violation and committing to provide the two reports by the end of
February 2001. Additionally, the licensee stated that in the future a
separate streamlined annual report will be generated whenever
incorporating it into the UFTR combined annual report would not meet
TS Section 6.6.1 requirements. The inspector found the licensees
commitment to provide the separate report was an acceptable corrective
action in response to the violation. The annual reports for reactor years
1997-1998, and 1998-1999 were received by the NRC on February 5,
and 22, 2001, respectively. Violation 50-083/2000-201-001, Failure to
comply with TS Section 6.6.1, Operating Reports, is closed.
(4) Design Control
Facility design changes were controlled by ODM-O.3 and O.4. The
inspector confirmed that questions from the RSRSs review and replies
from the reactor and HP staffs were documented and incorporated into
the modification packages using ODM Form O.4A.
The inspector also reviewed the 10 CFR 50.59 evaluations and
corresponding design change packages for 00-05 Dump valve
replacement, 01-06 two pen recorder replacement, 01-06 temperature
monitor replacement, and 01-15 source alarm repair.
From these reviews, the inspector determined that the facility design
change evaluations had adequate supporting documentation and
information. Additionally, the inspector found that the RSRS
committees 10 CFR 50.59 reviews and approvals were focused on
safety and met TS and UFTR requirements. Post installation verification
testing of the systems using Form O.2A, was thorough and adequately
documented on Form O.3A when completed. Procedure and drawing
changes were included in the change packages and were consistent
with TS and UFTR requirements for facility changes.
-8-
c. Conclusions
Based on the records reviewed, the inspector determined that 1) the licensee's
surveillance program and their associated limiting conditions for operation
satisfied TS requirements and 2) the licensee's maintenance and design change
programs were being implemented as required.
6. Security
a. Inspection Scope (IP 81401)
The inspector reviewed selected aspects of:
- the Physical Protection Plan
- security systems, equipment and instrumentations
- interviews with Campus Police Officers staff
- security audits
- viewed an emergency evacuation drill
- observed security alarm check
b. Observations and Findings
The Physical Protection Plan (PPP) dated September 28, 2001, revision 14, was
the latest revision approved by the NRC. The inspector toured the facility and
confirmed that the physical protection systems (barriers and alarms), equipment,
and instrumentation were in place as required by the PPP. The inspector
confirmed that the security checks, tests, verifications, and periodic audits were
performed and tracked as required by the PPP and observed that facility access
controls were being implemented as required by the PPP and licensee procedures
ODM F-1 through F-8. The inspector also verified that response rosters were
current and posted as required by the PPP and licensee procedures.
The inspector contacted the Campus Police Department. This Department
provided periodic patrols and initial response to events at the facility. The
inspector interviewed three campus police officers and one supervisor and
determined that they were knowledgeable of the reactor facility and their response
responsibilities.
c. Conclusions
Based on the observations made and the interviews conducted, the inspector
found the physical protection features of the UFTR facility, the equipment, and the
associated response procedures satisfied PPP.
7. Material Control and Accountability
a. Inspection Scope (IPs 85102 and 81431)
-9-
The inspector reviewed selected aspects of:
- Special Nuclear Material (SNM) accountability program
- SNM inventory and locations
- accountability records and reports
- accountability records and reports
b. Observations and Findings
The inspector reviewed the accountability records, the semiannual inventory of
material, and verified the accountability of 50% of the SNM not in the reactor core.
In accordance with licensee procedure ODM C.3, the licensees material control
and accountability program tracked locations and quantity of fuel and other SNM
against the operating license possession limits. Fuel burn-up related
measurements and calculations were found by the inspector to be acceptable and
properly documented. The inspector found that the material control and
accountability forms (DOE/NRC Forms 741 and 742) were prepared and
transmitted as required and the fuel inventory and movement records were cross
referenced and matched the notations made in the operations logbooks.
c. Conclusions
Based on the inspectors review of the UFTR safeguards program, the inspector
determined that the possession and use of SNM was limited to the locations and
purposes authorized by the facilitys operating license.
8. Training
a. Inspection Scope (IP 69001)
The inspector reviewed selected aspects of:
- the requalification program
- operators licenses
- operator training records
- operator physical examination records
- operator examination records
- operator active duty status
b. Observations and Findings
The inspector reviewed the operator requalification plan and performed a review of
three operator requalification records.
Licensee tracking records showed that all currently licensed operators were
successfully completing the emergency procedure and abnormal events training,
reactivity manipulations, and participating in the ongoing training as required by
-10-
the plan and licensee procedure ODM O.8. The inspectors review of 2000 and
2001 requalification training records and the June 2001 biennial exam confirmed
that licensed operators attended lectures on the appropriate subject material and
that annual operator performance and biennial comprehensive requalification
exams have been given as required by the plan. The inspector confirmed that 1)
the past test questions covered the subject matter specified by the program and
demonstrated technical depth; 2) required quarterly operation hours for ROs and
SROs, were being tracked; 3) biennial medical exams had been performed and
certified as required by 10 CFR Part 55 Subpart C; and 4) training was provided to
the reactor operators on maintenance operations and 10 CFR 50.59 design
changes and evaluations.
c. Conclusions
Based on the observations and findings made, the inspector found that the
requalification program was being implemented in a satisfactory manner and the
plan requirements were being met.
9. Exit Meeting Summary
The inspector presented the inspection results to members of licensee management at the
conclusion of the inspection on November 21, 2001. The licensee acknowledged the
findings presented and did not identify as proprietary any of the material provided to or
reviewed by the inspector during the inspection.
PARTIAL LIST OF PERSONS CONTACTED
Licensee
C.Hartsock Reactor Trainee
- J.Wolf Reactor Manager
- W.Vernetson Reactor Director
A.Vierbicky Senior Reactor Operator
- Attended Exit Meeting
INSPECTION PROCEDURE (IP) USED
IP 69001 Class II Non-power Reactors
IP 85102 Material Control and Accounting
IP 81401 Plans, Procedures, and Reviews
IP 81431 Fixed Site Physical Protection of Special Nuclear Material of Low Strategic
Significance
ITEMS OPENED, CLOSED, AND DISCUSSED
Opened None
Closed VIO 50-083/2000-201-001, Failure to comply with TS 6.6.1 Operating Reports.
Discussed None
PARTIAL LIST OF ACRONYMS USED
ANSI American National Standards Institute
ALARA As Low As Reasonably Achievable
DIR Reactor Director
HP Health Physics
LCO Limiting Conditions for Operation
NRC Nuclear Regulatory Commission
ODM Operating Documents Manual
RO Reactor Operator
RSRS Reactor Safety Review Subcommittee
RSO Radiation Safety Officer
PPP Physical Protection Program
RM Reactor Manager
SPERT Special Power Excursion Reactor Test
SRO Senior Reactor Operators
TS Technical Specifications
UFTR University of Florida Test Reactor