ML19210E572
| ML19210E572 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Dow Chemical Company |
| Issue date: | 10/22/1979 |
| From: | Fisher W, Hiatt J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19210E462 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-264-79-02, 50-264-79-2, NUDOCS 7912050315 | |
| Download: ML19210E572 (6) | |
See also: IR 05000264/1979002
Text
_.
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
REGION III
Report No. 50-264/79-02
Docket No. 50-264
License No. R-108
,
hicensee: Dow Chemical U.S.A.
1803 Building
Midland, MI 48640
Facility Name: TRIGA Reactor
Inspection At: TRIGA Reactor Site, Midland, MI
Inspection Cond eted: October 2-3, 1979
'
/6/$c2/'79
Inspector
. W. Hiatt
,
Approved By: W
F
1)f
/d/
79
'
'
Fuel Facility Projects and
Radiation Support Section
Inspection Summarv
Inspection on October 2-3, 1979 (Report No. 50-264/79-02)
Areas Inspected: Routine, unannounced inspection of radiation protection
and radwaste management program, including: qualifications; audits;
training; procedures; instruments and equipment; exposure control; posting,
labeling, and centrol; surveys; notifications and reports; records of
effluents; effluent control instruments; solid radwaste; and previous
commitments. The inspection involved 11 inspector-hours on site by one
hTC inspector.
Results: Of the thirteen areas inspected, no items of noncottpliance or
deviations were found in twelve areas; one apparent item of noncompliance
was found in one area (infraction - failure of Reactor Operations
Committee to meet quarterly - Paragraph 5).
1$f237
.
T 9120 5 0 315
.
.
-
DETAILS
1.
Persons Contacted
- 0.
Anders, Reactor Supervisor
- H. Gill, Research Manager, 1602 Building
- T.
Parsons, 3ealth Physicist
T. Quinn, Reactor Operator
s
- Denotes those present at exit interview.
2.
General
This inspection, which began with visual observation of facilities
and equipment, posting, labeling, and access controls at 8:15 a.m.
on October 2,1979, was conducted to examine the routine operational
radiation protection and radwaste management program.
During this
and subsequent tours, the inspector used a licensee survey meter to
survey the reactor area. The highest radiation level, about 5
mR/hr, was found near a source storage area. At full power (100
kW) the radiation level at waist level above the reactor pool was
,
about 4 mR/hr. The inspector also observed sample loading, irradia-
tion, and removal from the reactor; no problems were noted.
3.
Previous Inspection Findings
The following commitment listed in IE Report No. 50-264/78-02 was
reviewed:
(Closed) Formalizing wrltten procedures for the calibration of the
continuous air monitor and the water radiation monitor. The licensee
had formalized the above procedures (Paragraph 7).
4.
Organization
There were no changes in the reactor staff since the last radiation
protection inspection (May 1978) .
The staff consists of the reactor
supervisor, three full ti=e operators, and evo qualified " backup"
operators.
'
The reactor health physicist is a member of the Industrial Hygiene
Office. In September 1979 the Reaccor Cperations Committee confirmed
the appointment of Mr. T. Parsons as the reactor health physicist.
Mr. Parsons, who has an M. S. degree in Health Physics, replaces
Mr. D. Barsten, who left in September 1978.
In the interim (between
September 1978 and Septe=ber 1979) the reactor health physics
position was rotated between other health phy=; cists in the Industrial
Hygiene Office.
No problems were noted.
s
jggp c38
-2-
,
.
.
5.
Licensee Audits
Minutes of Reactor Operations Committee (ROC) and Radiation Safety
Committee (RSC) meetings held since May 1978 were reviewed. Membership
requirements for both _ammittees and meeting frequencies for the
RSC were as required in technical specifications I.2 and I.S.
However, the inspector noted that the ROC failed to meet in the
second quarter of 1979. This is an item of noncoopliance.
=
6.
Training
.
Outside of the reactor staff, no other individuals frequent the
The reactor staff receives radiation protection
reactor area.
training during annual requalification. Training required by 10
CFR 19.12 was also received.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
7.
Radiation Protection Procedures
As 'a result of a previous inspection,1/ the licensee formalized
procedures for calibrating the area radiation monitor (required by
T.S. I.7.a) and the water radiation monitor.
These procedures and
the continuous air monitor calibration procedure (required by T.S.
I. 7.a) are contained in th2 "' RIGA Operations Manual." The inspector
reviewsd the procedures; no problems were found.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
8.
Instruments and Equipment
a.
Portable Survev Instruments
Operable and calibrated instruments capable of detecting beta
and gamma radiation and neutrons were available at the reactor.
Additional instrumentation is available from the Industrial
Hygiene Office if needed. Records reviewed showed that the
instruments are calibrated either quarterly (ionization type
and neutron meters) or annually (Geiger-Mueller type meters).
b.
Area Radiation Monitors
,
In May 1978 use of a new area radiation monitgy (ARM) was
approved by the Reactor Operations Cenmittee.--
Records
reviewed indicate that the monitor was calibrated in May 1978
and March and September 1979 (T.S. G.3 requires an annual
frequency).
During a facility tour the inspector verified
that the monitor's audible alarm was functional.
1/
IE Inspection Report No. 50-264/78-02.
2/
Ibid.
-3-
.
150f
239
-
c.
Continuous Air Monitor (CAM)
The inspector reviewed records of calibrations and alarm
setpoint checks since May 1978 and noted that the frequency
was as required by T.S. G.3.
The inspector also verified that
an audible alarm was initiated when the setpoint was exceeded.
No items of noncompliance were identified in the above areas.
'
9.
Exposure Control
.
a.
External Exposure
The vendor's film badge reports were reviewed for the period
May 1978 to date. The greatest whole body and extremity doses
received in CY 1978 vere 60 mress and 220 mrems, respectively.
No measurable whole body dose has been received in CY 1979 to
date; the highest extremity dose has been about 180 mrems.
Self-reading pocket dosimeters are available if needed. The
inspector noted that the dosimeters had not been calibrated by
the licensee. The licensee stated that calibration would be
considered. This item will be reviewed further during a
future inspection.
b.
Internal Exposure
The licensee has no routine bioassay or air sampling programs
and relies of the CAM, contamination swipe tests, and pool
water analysis to define any problem areas. Records of the
above indicators were reviewed; no problems were noted. The
inspector noted that pool water was last analyzed for tritium
in 1971. The licensee stated that the current tritium concen-
tration will be analyzed. This item will be reviewed further
during a future inspection.
No items of noncompliance were identified in the above areas.
10.
Posting and Labeling
The licensee's compliance with posting and labeling requirements
specified in 10 CFR 19.11 and 10 CFR 20.203 were reviewed. No
problems were noted.
11
Materials
Radioactive material received at the Dow complex is surveyed by the
Industrial Hygiene Office. The SAcensee stated that no material
has been received under the TRIG 3 license since the last radiation
protection inspection (May 1978).
Radioactive Material produced in
tha TRIGA is used within the facility.
No items of noncompliance v .re identified.
-4-
.
1)$9I
240
,
,
12.
Surveys
As a result of a new program instituted by the Industrial Hygiene
Of fice, in July 1979 the reactor staff began conducting and documenting
contamination and area surveys monthly.
The Industrial Hygiene
Office makes quarterly contamination surveys of the f acility.
Results of surveys performed by both groups were reviewed. Only
low-level, short-lived contamination was noted.
,
No items of noncompliance were identifisi.
.
13.
Notification and Reports
A review of records and discussions with licensee representatives
indicated no problems in the licensee's compliance with 10 CFR 19
end 10 CFR 20 requirements.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
'
14.
Radwaste Management
a.
Liquid Radwaste
,
The only liquid released from the facility is domestic water
used to rinse demineralizer resia during resin changes (performed
about once per 18 months). The water is drained into a drum,
stored for several months, gamma scanned, and, if no activity
is detected, released to the sanitary sewer. The licensee
stated that no activity had been detected. About ten to
twenty gallons of distilled water are added to the reactor
pool each week to replace water lost by evaporation. Liquid
samples are evaporated and the planchets disposed as solid
waste.
b.
Gaseous Radwaste
The licensee has no gaseous effluent monitor. At the inspector's
request the licensee calculated that the amount of Ar-41
released annually would be less than 0.1 curie. The inspector
reviewed this calculation and concurred with the method used
and the results.
Any potential particulate effluents would be detected by the
CAM. No significant particulate activity was noted,
c.
Solid Radwaste
Solid radwaste (gloves, paper, etc.) is cellected by the
Industrial Hygiene Office and transferred (under NRC Byproduct
Material License No. 21-00265-06) to a licensed disposal
agency. About one 55-gallon drum of waste is generated annually
by the reactor facility.
-5-
.
11F0f 241
,
,
.
The licensee does not plan to submit a quality assurance
program satisfying the criteria specified in 10 CFR 71, Appendix E.
The licensee was aware that, until such a program is
submitted, no shipments of greater than Type A quantities of
radioactive material can be made.
No items of noncompliance were identified in the above areas.
15.
Exit Interview
,
The inspector met with licensee representatives (denoted in Paragraph
-
1) at the conclusion of the inspection on October 3, 1979. The
inspector sotmmarized the scope and findings of the inspection.
In
response to certain items discussed by the inspector, the licensee:
Acknowledged the noncompliance with Reactor Operations Committee
a.
meeting frequency (Paragraph 5).
b.
Stated that the calibration of self-reading pocket dosimeters
would be considered (Paragraph 9.a).
c.
Stated that the evaluation of tritium concentration in reactor
pool water would be considered (Paragraph 9.b).
d.
Acknowledged the inspector's comments concerning their lack of
a quality assurance program satisfying the criteria specified
in 10 CFR 71, Appendix E (Paragraph 14.c).
.
-6-
.
1! Lot 247