ML20054C765
See also: IR 05000047/1976002
Text
__
_ _ . , _ _
.
i.
.
'
-
,
IE:I Form 12
~
(Jan 75) (Rev)
-m-
m.~-
,, 7
th2 L.
U. S. NUCLEAR REGUL\\ TORY CC:CIISSION
OFFICE OF INS?ECTION AND ENFORCDIENT
REGION I
.
IE Inspection Report No:
50-47/76-02
Docket No:
50-47
Lic ensee:
U. S. Army Materials and Mechanics Research Center
License No:
R-65
Watertown Arsenal
Priority:
--
Watertown, Massachusetts 02172
Category:
G
Safeguards
Group:
--
Loca tion:
Watertown, Massachusetts
Research Reactor (?ossess Only)
Type of Licensee:
,
Routine, Unannounced
Type of Inspection:
Dates of Inspection:
August 26-27, 1976
Nofember 25,1975 (Operations)
Dates of Previous Inspection:
e
,
,
Reporting Inspector:
/ --i bds
/N )
'
4_, --
,
s e /-
'
'
DAT"r
L./Norrhol=, Reactor Inspector
V
Acco panying Inspectors:
emre
DATE
.
DATE
DATE
-
l
!
Other Accompanying Personnel:
NONE
'
DATE
,
,
,f
9 d !74>
Reviewed By:
.L,
MN' '
D. L. Caphtoit, Chief, Reactor Projects Section No. 2,
'DATE
Reactor Operations and Nuclear Support Branch
8204210619 911005
KADAT-Z81-311
!
-
- ' '
- - -
.
.
-
. _ .-
( .
h
i
SUMMARY OF FINDLNGS
Enforcement Action
None.
Licensee Action on Previousiv Identified Items of Noncompliance
The following Itens of Nonconpliance were identified in NRC:I Inspection
1
Report 50-47/75-01 dated December 12, 1975. By response letter dated
January 22, 1976, the licensee outlined corrective action for these
items.
A.
Infraction relating to failure of Reactor Safeguards Cennittee to
conduct periodic audits.
The inspector had no further questions on
this ites.
(Detail, 2b)
B.
Deficiency relating to failure to conduct visual surveillance
inspections. The inspector had no further questions on this item.
(Detail, Sa)
C.
Deficiency _ relating to failure to post docunents required by 10 CFR 19.11.
The inspector had no further questions on this item.
(Detail, 6c).
Desien Changes
None.
Unusual Occurrences
,
l'
None.
Other Significant Findings
l
l
A.
Current Findings
i
l
1.
Acceptable Items
.
(These are matters not involving an item of noncompliance or
an unresolved ites.)
.
a.
Administration and Organization (Detail, 2)
l
i
b.
Operations (Detail, 3)
--
_.
--
- - _ _ - _ _ - - .
-
. . . . - _ .
.
.
V
-.
.
-2-
c.
Containment (Detail, 4)
d.
Surveillance Tests-General (Details, Sa, b, c)
Radiation Protection (Detail, 6)
e.
2.
Unresolved Items
(An unresolved item is a matter about which more information
is required in order to ascertain whether it is an acceptable
item or an item of noncompliance.)
Records to demonstrate that semi-annual checks of the fire
alarm system had been satisfactorily performed were not
available.
(Detail, 5d)
B.
Status of Previous Unresolved Items
None.
Management Interview
An exit interview was conducted on August 27, 1976, at Watertown Arsenal
with the following persons in attendance:
Mr. J. J. O'Connor, Reactor Facility Supervisor
Mr. L. J. Norrhcim, Reactor Inspector, USNRC
Items Discussed
A.
Purpose of Inspection
The inspector outlined the scope of the routine unannounced in-
spection as a review of activities under the " possess only" license,
including inspections, surveillance and health physics practices.
.
B.
Other Items
The following specific items were discussed:
,
1.
Previous Items of Noncompliance.
(Details, 2b, Sa, 6c)
2.
Unresolved item relative to periodic testing of fire alarms.
(Detail, 5d)
3.
Cathodic protection system surveillance.
(Detail, 4)
4.
Record Keeping.
(Detail, 4b)
5.
Independent survey results.
(Detail, 6a)
.,
S
q
.
s
-
.
DETAILS
1.
Persons Contacted
Mr. J. J. O'Connor, Chief, Technology Planning and Exploitation
Division and Reactor Facility Supervisor
Mr. S. Levin, Chief, Radiation and Occupational Safety 3 ranch
Mr. A. J. Colacey, Chief, Facilities Engineering 3 ranch
Mr. A. Kalinaukas, Captain, Security Section
Mr. G. Flanders, Electrical Engineering Technician
2.
Administration and Orzanization
a.
No change in the facility organi:ation has been =ade in either
structure or personnel since the previous inspection.
b.
The Reactor Safeguards Committee =e=bership is as described in
the previous inspection report.
The same report * identified,
as an item of noncompliance, the failure of the Coc=1ttee to
conduct periodic audits as required by Technical Specifications.
The inspector reviewed the minutes of a Reactor Safeguards
Committee =eeting held on April 1,1976, which included all
members.
During this =eeting, a tour of the facilic'; was
conducted which precipitated several recommendations relative
to safety and integrity of the facility.
In addition, a
l
schedule was established to hold meetings semi-annually,
following periodic radiation surveys.
The inspector had no further questions in this area at this
j
time.
1
!
- NRC:I Inspection Report 50-47/75-01 dated Dece=ber 12, 1975.
3.
Operations
-
a.
Logs and Records
l
!
l
To review the conduct of operations since the previous in-
l
spection, the inspector examined, on a sa=pling basis, the
j
following licensee records covering the periods indicated:
l
l
t
-
_
.
'
e
'
-
m
.
.
s
- 4,- .
(1) Record of Access to Reactor Facility
11/25/75
-8/26/76
(2) Cathodic Protection Surveillance Record 10/23/75 - 6/4/76
(3) Reactor Safeguards Ccamittee Minutes
- 4/1/76
(4) Fire Prevention Inspection Reports
1/1/75 - 7/31/76
(5) Weekly Reactor ?. M. Inspection Reports 1/15/76 - 7/28/76
(6) Reactor Facility Radiation and
t
Contamination Surveys
1976 - (Selected)
(7) Liquid Release Records
- 6/28/76
b.
The facility remains in a shutdown " standby" status.
Contain-
cent entries are =ade only for periodic surveillance and
inspections. No other use has been sade of the facility.
J
No changes to this status are anticipated.
4.
Containment
Technical Specification 4.b requires that voltage and current
a.
readings of the cathodic protection system be obtained quarter-
ly and that the effectiveness of the system be checked semi- '
annually using a half-cell.
The above checks are made by the Arsenal Facility Engineering
'
3 ranch.
The inspector reviewed the results of checks made on the
following dates:
10/23/75
SATISFACTORY
12/22/75
SATISFACTORY
2/10/76
GROUND FROZEN
4/6/76
SATISFACTORY
6/4/76
SATISFACTORY
The inspector had no further questions in this area at this
,
time.
b.
Records of the above tests are retained by the Facility Engineer-
ing Branch.
A licensee representative acknowledged the inspector's
suggestion that a report or duplicate record be provided to
the Reactor Supervisor to assure a check of compliance with
Technical Specifications.
.
-
.
.
_ _
-- -
,
. - -
-
__
_ _ _ - _ _ _.-_-
_
_
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _
m
,q
'
,)
,
.
.
.
5-
-
.
5.
Surveillance Tests
Technical Specification 4.a. (1) requires a weekly visual
i
a.
inspection of the heating and ventilation systems. The
,'
1
inspector reviewed the Intelligence and Security Branch (ISB)
!
records of access to the reactor facility in order to verify
that individuals with responsibility in this area made entries
to the facility at least weekly.
i
A previous inspection * identified failures to perform the
!
above weekly inspections. No subsequent failures were identi-
fied.
The inspector had no further questions in this area,
,
i
b.
Technical Specification 4.a. (2) requires a monthly check of
all heating and ventilation equipment in accordance with a
'
written checklist.
l
The inspector's review of checklists identified no problems in
.
this area.
1
Technical Specification 4.c requires a check of fire fighting
l
c.
equipment be performed at least monthly.
.
These checks are conducted by the Post Fire F.arshal who
completes a Fire Prevention Inspection Report.
The inspector reviewed the reports and conducted a tour of the
facility to verify fire protection / prevention adequacy.
The inspector had no questions in this area at this time.
d.
Technical Specification 4.d requires that the fire alarm
system be operability checked semi-annually.
These checks are performed by a sub-contractor. Due to the
absence of the Post Fire Marshal at the time of this inspection,
records of fire alarm checks were not available for review.
The inspector's review of the IS3 access records indicated
that entries to the facility to check fire alarm operability
,
l
had been made.
.
L
- NRC:I Inspection Report 50-47/75-01 dated Dece=ber 12, 1975.
i
l
l
l
I
l
l
._ _
- -w
, m
e,%-.
m..
s.6e-y.--
,w-
rv
, -
p..m
-
y.
w-
.
-~
-.
-_
_ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
__
. _ _ _ .
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
__
,.
m
c.,
!
-6-
'
'
This item is unresolved (76-02-01) pending review of licensee
records of fire alarm checks.
6.
Radiation Protection
a.
Technical Specification 3.a requires that a facility radiation
survey, including smears, be performed at least quarterly.
The inspector reviewed records of surveys conducted on Feb-
ruary 21, April 3, and July 24, 1976.
Licensee results of the July 24, 1976 survey indicated the
following:
Airborne. activity
Less than MDA
Removable Contamination
Less than 21 pei/100 cm,'
General Area
.01 .02 mrem /hr
Pool Top
2 mrem /hr
Core level, in pool
3.8 Rem /hr
The inspector conducted an independent survey using a cali-
brat ~ed NRC instrument (Eber11ne E-120, serial 3173), which
corroborated the licensee's results (Contamination, general
area and pool top values were verified).
The inspector had no further questions in this area at this
time.
b.
The licensee has made one recent liquid release from the
facility hold tank.
The fluid is attributable to condensation
collected inside the containment.
The release was made on June 28, 1976, and consisted of
8645.2 gallons of water with the following activity:
Beta
3.92 X 10-7 sci /mi
Total release:
12.8 mei
Alpha
3.6 X 10-8mei/mi
Total release:
1.13 mei
l
The inspector had no further questions in this area at this
i
time.
,
The previous inspection * identified a failure to post docu-
c.
7
l
ments required by 10 CFR 19.11.
The inspector's review of corrective action identified no
further questions in this area.
j
1
--
-- ----
=
.,
.,-.__..,._,.__,,r
_ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ , - _
__ - __
,,
m
e,
-
-
,,
/
.
.
-7-
To preclude physical loss of these items or loss of appli-
cability by revision, the licensee indicated that a notice
would be posted directing interested individuals to the
i
location of current copies of the documents.
- NRC:I Inspection Report 50-47/75-01 dated December 12, 1975.
!
4
t
i
3
a
3
e
!
)
i
.
I
!
l-
1
t
k
.
!
e
-
.
_. . _ . .
..
-
_-
_ ._. _ _ _ .
_
.
.
..
.
.
- - -
. .
.