ML19309C858

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
IE Insp Rept 50-002/80-01 on 800121-23.No Noncompliance Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Radwaste Programs Including Qualifications,Audits,Facilities,Training,Procedures, & Equipment
ML19309C858
Person / Time
Site: University of Michigan
Issue date: 02/21/1980
From: Fisher W, Miller D, Paul R
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III)
To:
Shared Package
ML19309C854 List:
References
50-002-80-01, 50-2-80-1, NUDOCS 8004090327
Download: ML19309C858 (7)


See also: IR 05000002/1980001

Text

..

1

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT

REGION III

Report No. 50-002/80-01

Docket No.50-002

License No. R-28

Licensee:

University of Michigan

Michigan Meniorial-Phoenix Project.

Ann Arbor, MI 48105

Facility Name: Ford Nuclear Reactor

Inspection At: Ford Nuclear Reactor Site

Ann Arbor, MI

Inspection Conducted: January 21-23, 1980

f , f +adv

Inspectors:

D. E. Miller

2 - / V- * C'

,

S'

~

IC A. Paul

M

fY

b,

'

I

s

%

Approved By:

W. L. $'isher, Chief

A /[P c'

Fuel Facility Projects and

'

'

Radiation Support Section

Inspection Summary:

Inspection on January 21-23, 1980 (Report No. 50-002/80-01)

Areas inspected: Routine, unannounced inspection of radiation protection

and radioactive waste programs, including: qualifications; audits; faci-

lities; training; procedures; instruments and equipment; exposure con-

trol; surveys; effluent releases; records and reports of effluents;

effluent control instrumentation; posting, labeling, and control; notifi-

cation and reports; licensee act. ion on previously identified enforcement

items and commitments; and IE bulletins and circulars.

The inspection

involved 34 inspector-hours on site by two NRC inspectors.

Results: No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.

8004090 3 1

_ _ . _

-

.._

_.

6..

'

DETAILS

I

1.

Persons Contacted

  • W.

Kerr, Director of Phoenix Project

  • R. Burn, Reactor Manager

l

  • G. Cook, Assistant Reactor Manager

J. Jones, Radiation Laboratory Manager

  • M.

Driscoll, Health Physicist

l

J. Wahl, Supervisor of Reactor Operations

4

4

  • V. Rigot, Health Physics Technician

I

The inspectors also contacted other members of the licensee's staff.

,

  • Denotes those attending the exit interview.

2.

General

This inspection, which began at 1:00 p.m. on January 21, 1980, was

conducted to examine the radiation protection and radwaste aspects

i

!

of routine plant operations, past item of noncompliance, response to

IE Bulletins, and past commitments made by the licensee.

3.

Licensee Actions on Previous Inspection Findings

J

i

(Closed) Noncompliance (50-002/78-03): There was no documentation to

confirm that the gamma spectrometry equipment-used to measure liquid

waste tank contents had been calibrated since March 1977. The inspec-

'

tors reviewed the licensee's response dated October 24, 1978, and

i

consider it to be acceptable.

(Paragraph 8)

4.

Organization

4

l

Since the last report (78-3), the licensee has filled-the Health

.

'

Physics Technician position. The remainder of the licensee's organi-

zation remains unchanged. No problems were identified.

5.

Training

Radiation protection instructions are provided to personnel upon

'

initial entry to the Phoenix Memorial Laboratory (PML) - Ford.

i

-

i

Nuclear Reactor (FNR) Facility.

Retraining requirements have been

i

implemented since the last inspection. .The inspectors selectively

,

reviewed the requalification retraining records of certain reactor-

operators for 1979.

No discrepancies were identified. Additional

radiation protection training provided. experimenters, reactor opera--

tors, and health physics personnel is tailored for their specific

<

i

work. Records of this training are not maintained.

i

No ' items of noncompliance or deviations _ were identified.

.

' 2-

1

- ,.

,

,

-...y-

- -

a

w

- --~,

--ee

m4

-

-,m,

.

_. .

-=

._-

_ -

-

_

.

e.

I

6.

Review and Audit

The inspectors reviewed an audit conducted on August 24 and 25, 1978,

by a reactor manager from another research reactor facility, and an

audit conducted on July 23 and 24, 1979, by a chief reactor super-

visor from a different research reactor facility. These audits in-

cluded procedure compliance and technical review of several health

physics procedures. The 1979 audit report included several comments

concerning desirable procedure clarifications. The comments were

considered by the licensee and procedure changes made. No items

requiring corrective actions were identified by the auditors.

The Safety Review Committee minutes for the period November 1978

through December 1979 were reviewed for information related to

'

health physics activities. The inspector noted that technical

specification, experiment, and health physics procedure changes are

routinely reviewed. The Director of Radiation Control Services for

the university continues to provide radiological safety experience

,'

to the committee.

L

No problems were identified.

!

7.

Procedures

-

.

'

During the previous radiation protection inspection, the inspector

identified six areas which required procedure development or revision

(78-03, Paragraph 6). The following health physics procedures have

since been developed or revised by the licensee:

HP-il5

Revised 8/79

Retention' Tank Monitoring

and Dumping

HP-207

Original 8/79

Effluent Activity Calculation

HP-205

Revised 9/79

GM Monitor Operational Check

HP-203

Revised 8/78

Juno Calibrations

HP-107

Revised 11/78

Heavy Water Tritium Analysis

The above new and revised procedures were reviewed by the inspectors

'

and were found to adequately address the subjects identified during

the previous inspection. The inspectors have no further questions

concerning these matters at this time.

I

No items of noncompliance or. deviations were identified.

8.

Instruments and Equipment

The licensee possessed an adequate supply of alpha, beta gamma, and

neutron survey instruments. Selective review of the calibration

records for 1979 did not identify any discrepancies from the quarterly

i

-3-

L

..

t

calibration frequency specified in the licensee's Healh Physics

Manual. Seven fixed NaI radiation detectors are utilized to provide

warning (alarm) and display (local and remote) of facility radiation

levels.

One monitor, the FNR exhaust monitor, initiates a reactor

scram and ventilation isolation when radiation levels exceed 1

mR/hr.

Selective review of the licensee's records for 1979 did not

reveal any discrepancies from the technical specification requirements

for operability, setpoints, actuating functions, or calibrations of

these monitors.

Gaseous air detectors (GAD), calibrated for argon-41, continuously

monitor the FNR ventilation exhaust and the FKR-PML stack No. 2

exhaust. Moving airborne particulate monitors (MAP) continuously

monitor the beam port and pool floors and the combined discharges of

the four FNR-PML stacks.

The licensee's calibration and operational

check records for the MAP's and GAD's were selectively reviewed for

1979.

No discrepancies from the technical specification requirements

for operability, testing, or calibrations were identified.

During the previous radiation protection inspection the inspector

noted that the licensee had failed to maintain records of calibration

for gamma spectrometry equipment, used to measure liquid waste tank

contents, for a specific period of time. The inspectors verified

that the corrective actions listed in the licensee's response dated

October 28, 1978, were instituted, and consider them to be adequate.

The inspectors have no further questions at this time.

9.

Personal Monitoring

The licensee uses film whole body and TLD ring badges for personal

monitoring. The whole body and ring badge exchange frequencies are

monthly and biweekly, respectively.

Badge records for the last

quarter 1978 and for the first nine months of 1979 were reviewed.

Monthly whole body doses were generally less than 200 mrems; no

quarterly exposures exceeded 1250 mrems.

Biweekly extremity doses

were generally less than 1000 mrems; no quarterly doses exceeded

18.75 rems.

The licensee uses the vendor's personal dosimetry reports as official

records.

NRC Form 4's are not utilized. There is no evidence to

suggest that individuals under 18 years of age have received doses

in excess of 10% of the applicable values specified in 10 CFR 20.101(a).

Area neutron and gamma film badges are located at several places

near the experimental beam ports.

Film badge records indicate gamma

radiation fields and no neutron radiation fields.

On the basis of

an experiment conducted by the licensee, which consisted of measuring

neutron fields by placing albedo neutron dosimeters at a variety of

places in the reactor building, including the beam port areas, neu-

tron radiation fields up to 2200 mrems per month were found. The

licensee will explore other neutron detection methods to determine

the best method to evaluate personal whole body exposures to workers

-4-

. -

_-

--

-

-

,

.

.-

--

.

.

..

I

in neutron radiation fields. This matter will be reviewed during a

future inspection.

No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.

10.

Bioassay

Licensee procedures require urinalysis bioassays if the airborne

tritium concentration exceeds 1 MPC during heavy water transfers.

Review of airborne tritium survey records for the heavy water trans-

fers conducted since the previous radiation protection inspection

revealed no tritium concentrations exceeding 5% of the occupational

MPC. The licensee had, however, conducted tritium urinalysis on

1

(

several individuals involved in heavy water transfers. The urin-

alysis records were reviewed; the highest tritium concentration was

30 pCi/ml.

No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.

11.

Respiratory Protection

The licensee does not have an approved (10 CFR 20.103.e) respiratory

protection program and, therefore, is not authorized to take credit

'

for the protection afforded by respiratory equipment in estimating

exposure of individuals to airborne concentrations of radioactive

material. Respiratory protection equipment is not used routinely

,

but is available for emergency use.

'

,

No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.

12.

Surveys

-

The inspectors selectively reviewed records of direct radiation, sur-

face contamination, and airborne activity surveys conducted during

1979 in accordance with licensee procedures HP-101 through 104.

No

problems with frequency or extent of surveys were identified.

13.

Airborne Effluents

4

Airborne activity from the FNR is released through FNR-PML stack

No. 2 and the FNR ventilation exhaust stack.

Both release paths are

equipped with gaseous monitors and iodine and par .iculate samplers

for quantification of airborne releases. The inspectors selectively

reviewed the licensee's airborne effluent analyses and release cal-

l

culations for 1979. The dilution factor allowed by the technical

specifications (400) is not necessary to satisfy the release limits

for iodines or particulates but is necessary for gaseous releases.

Using the allowable dilution factor, gaseous releases were less than

10% of.the technical specification limit.

t

Since the last inspection the licensee has performed an evaluation

to determine the charcoal and particulate filter collection efficien-

i

-5-

r_

!

r-

!

. . . _ .

.,.

.

.

_

. .

'

cies and the effect on sample flow as the filters load-up with use.

The results of this evaluation indicate particulate and charcoal

collection efficiencies were greater than 99 percent and 97 percent

respectively. The evaluation also showed there is no significant

effect on the sample flow rate as the filters load.

No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.

14.

Liquid Effluents

Liquid wastes continue to be released to the sanitary sewer through

two series five-micron filters.

Collection and holdup is accomplished

in three 2800 gallon retention tanks.

Gamma isotopic, tritium, and

gross beta analyses are performed before discharge. The inspector

selectively reviewed the licensee's liquid effluent analyses and

release calculations for 1979. No discrepancies from the limits

specified in 10 CFR 20.303 or the technical specifications for sur-

veillance or release concentrations or quantities were noted.

15.

Effluent Report

The inspector reviewed the radioactive effluent releases reported in

the licensee's Report on Reactor Operations for the period January 1,

1979, to December 31, 1979.

Selective comparison of the reported

radioactive effluents with the licensee's analyses records did not

identify any discrepancies in the 1979 data.

Due to the shared rad-

waste f acilities utilized by PML and FNR, the reported ef fluents in-

clude a portion of the PML effluents in addition to those originating

from FNR.

No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.

16.

Pool Water Chemistry and lleavy Water Reflector Tank Tritium

Review of the licensee's records for 1979 confirmed that pool water

radioactivity analyses were conducted at least biweekly and heavy

water reflector tank tritium analyses were conducted at least quar-

terly. Tritium content of heavy water reflector tank remained less

than 50 curies.

No abnormal activity or trends were noted.

No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.

17.

Posting, Labeling, and Control

The inspectors toured the licensee's facilities in the company of

licensee representatives.

General housekeeping and control of

radiation hazards appeared adequate. Radiation caution postings and

control of high radiation areas were observed to comply with regula-

tory requirements,

f

-6-

L

.

.

_

_-

.

. . . . .

. , _ ~ - - -

. -- -

. .

. _ . -

-

'

.

.

!

,

\\

'

18.

Solid Radwaste

)

Radioactive waste materials generated at FNR are transferred in

t

temporary packaging to the University Radiation Control Services

l-

Organization who packages the materials for disposal. A review of

j

the licensee's response to IE Bulletin 79-19 will be performed

during a future inspection of the University broad license.

1

No items of noncompliance were identified.

,

I

19.

Radioactive Material Shipping

i

,

The licensee plans to ship spent fuel in March 1980.

The inspectors

asked the licensee if they had submitted their Quality Assurance

program in accordance with 10 CFR 71.51.

The licensee stated that

,

,

the required submittal was made on September 21, 1979.

No problems

l

1

were identified.

!

I

'

)

20.

Exit Interview

f

r

,

The inspectors met with licensee representatives (denoted in Paragraph

1) at the conclusion of the inspection on January 23, 1J80.

r

$

The following matters were discussed:

l

The purpose and scope of the inspection.

a.

4

1

!

b.

The previous item of noncompliance concerning records of gamma

,

!

4

spectrometry equipment calibration.

The inspectors stated that

!

this matter is considered closed.

(Paragraph 8)

i

c.

Previous commitments to develop or revise procedures.

The in-

spectorr stated that adequate procedures had been developed

or revised covering the subjects listed in Paragraph 6 of in-

l

spection report 78-03 and that the inspectors had no further

f

questions at this time.

(Paragraph 7)

'

!

d.

Previous commitment to evaluate particulate and charcoal col-

1ection efficiencies.

The inspectors stated that this matter

.

is considered completed.

(Paragraph 13)

e.

Alternate methods of personal neutron dosimetry.

The licensee

'

stated that they will explore currently availabic methods of

neutron dosimetry to determine the best method to evaluate

'

personal whole body exposures at their facility.

(Paragraph 9)

i-

,

- 7 --

l'

. - - - - -.