ML20154F810
| ML20154F810 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Neely Research Reactor |
| Issue date: | 01/22/1988 |
| From: | Karam R Neely Research Reactor, ATLANTA, GA |
| To: | Fredrickson P NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20154F789 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8809200139 | |
| Download: ML20154F810 (15) | |
Text
_ _-_
g
'h Georgia Institute of Technology 3,
.l NEELY NUCLEAR RESEARCH CENTER 900 ATLANTIC OAIVE
- ( L '7
'q,Q,o '[*
ATLANTA. GEORGIA 30332-0425 (404) 004-3G00 ATTACHMENT A t
I
[
January 22, 1988 4
f
't. Paul Frodrickson
- .u:1 car Pogulatory Com::tission T.0; ion II 201 Marietta Stroot, N.W.
.;tlanta, Georgia 30323 l car Mr. Fredricksont En:1csod pleaso find results of smear survoys taken during thu
.m ::h c! Augusc. Also included is 'ho survey of Mr. Downs apartmont tasan on 1/11/SS.
I i asked ::r. Boyd about why thosc results woro not given to you l
carlict. His answar was that Mr. Kuzo was informcd about them but did not spc:ifici.lly ask for thcm.
I j
If ycu hava any questions please let ma know.
i-Sincarcly yours o f
M We l
R. A. Yaram i
.~.
.'t awa l
l At t 3:h~cnts (3) t 1
i j
8009200139 800613 l
l gDR ADOCM 05000160 PNV
(,
l l
i,
- n. u u w -c, -, - w,.,,,-,
4
9.
3 :
O 9'
6 I
z p
t=1 M i 4
>=
w
.a.
e e
O e
- g
- " 0 l
t i 2.i, l,
p 7 -- h _._.S.....
)
i 1
- r m..
3 i
/ {.
v g?
l
-if f
Y y
1
-l f i
8 5
i i
=
a p> >
3 L
t
_Je
^
LL' AAAA/
9/
7 W
J]Tvil tgi i
2:
i l {l :h
_ Y I
s I
~
4,.
t a g 3.,3 w; my q.s i
5
?
,Lg_.f ai3.___p_ y a s
um
>i 9.,r y/
-,!c~ i.l-A "I
n
-a e
! 1
~/ vw:; I
?
?
?
W M
3 Q,I (
, k, M-.O s
j
. ~-
fi ' \\.3' hW
{g 9-,
a_V_-
g.
e I
+
, '. D kOk!li N
.>9
.?
.r-7 l'
i s"',
g j
N I,i is a
9
)
fj-M 1
xxA m
1 8
s.
\\ig i
N l
l
, ~~..
- {-:
S n,e 5
- J.4 O
I :
?"2 Ul a
z d
6 5o s
m h,
f
., -p-SE T
t.m; 1
v
}
3 z~
n.r -
s:.
1 I
'd ;
l l
J n
'h u
I' i
t a
L c
~~K 1~ ~-
s J
ll V
^
8 8 6
'l 4
]
A[f
's
- J
}
i a
sO-d A
w 3e i
7e
- ep~
+
4 1_ !sI'ii!Illi'
^
}
ll*
l t,.
3 e
/
s\\.
g 1
1 i
i I
n M
x
/
0
/
U
t J %
g 0
l 3at w
n e s W
l
- l; O
l#
i:
'n*
ia e
h ai m
5 3
I b
M i
O w
O 5
j!
h
'4 34 8
- x<
LT-- -
- 1,
}
)
1
- l 3 1 C
- -
e g
!! h i
A
'li u
Cg 1,
j u'
NI W
II i,
s f
y-_ _ -
-y'
,l, 4;],--. b,!
y
.l o
z
.j 8-l wAmoi!!ni!!I g
I k
/
f Y'l Ih
)'
+
i l
\\
il k
I o
\\g i
\\
- A
5.
9=d s
v g
g O
C 0,
u r
,, [ f m
(
De p
I'
~*
4LP
~
a l: i 1
s e
e a
p c
y r-
,i q
g
,-i I
9 h
h 5
Y b
b b b.3 v
v
-k*!ypjd-o
- ! Edw 'Aam/ w'.JMlA3
- c
<je e
a p"
l 3
3 l
1, /
t,
.! o ':
.t e
s.
e g,t,p M pl gu m p' {:: eTT.U
~' F-N.
=
g;n Y <w, s
1 g' 3
F i
em s
,I
--ra o
f,
- i a
o, h
Y a
g 2
?
l
' ')[
S' 3-3 d
_ I 3-i.
i j
l r
T u-
[]j
.N" ~
"#W" ff
!I 4
s4 y
I T
I i ii 2
il ?
h
- y. = s 's _.,-. _. _ _ _ _ _.. __,
a r
i
'f T.
Nl 9
s:
a 1
i r
e' d
E i
,.p, '
g4;
. h, y
(
s e
o u.... = u g
Ii
- L u
h d
A
\\
d
.fi
' l-O n
g a
.Ik, l
s l
}
~
j,$,/ q' %j o
j@%'\\
o
.. s W
C
//1 10 f
f Gq /e l
av n
(},
g
. "\\ \\
7
\\
O 4
<h
'/
\\\\.
Q.
s
/
{
g N
c, h
s e
9
x.,
j 6
3
?
lu s IJ,:
( 7 - J'* ;
'I liA11/i MASSI.1:2; 51;1W13 ItEPORT Dli! X 1000 DK1E MONTil: b 2.e_,
s2/3 E
, 19 b _
ICdA 1
2, 3 4, S 6 7 8
, 10, 11 12, 13 14, 15 16 17 18 19 20 21, 22
- 23. 24, 25 26 27 28.29
- 30. 31 1
l 41 '48
_{
Ll [' #l
--l k j
4\\
[
<~)
[
(
,k 'I
(
2 4f pI cl
'l k
c(
[
c)
<} [
,e {
3
- \\
k l
f s\\
f rf 0
f ef ll 4
- 'k!
4f
'I N
'\\
Cf C{ [
y 3
Ch 4)!
[
[
,41 d
4\\
[
<l c( \\
c[
i Lt
,fN
\\ '\\
l Lt f~I 6
'l <\\ f\\
h
/ \\
cl
<l /\\
Cl 7
'\\
'\\
41 W
<l l
hh f
<l
<- l %/c!
/\\
A
<t
)?Q
's W W sl /%
A*
ft m
M /%.,1 s
9
\\
L\\ %\\
\\
Lll W,0 4\\
kl 4l
,J L\\
<f 10 c( !' I GI,
4 N.
c5 M'
c}
(l
,<1 N/i s
et A m ~\\ %f
<\\,
%f
<g cl %
c) n A
-s I
- I
'#I M
<k 12 I '
s=
yyyo%
4k
- )
Cf.
f
~
g
~
~
~
gg g
Ecadings:
Elank - Reading 3 not taken Check - Insignificant Count DPM:
",M Anstring an ef ficiency of 10% for the W
Ceiger Counter with Pancake.
/
Radiological Safety Officer p
g. v e. c7 %
g,cc w ~Y C. u - 4
- fo -.s h -
j N
\\
, -, m.,,
1
]
i l_
m a,w w~ a
. y l
=yh r n i.
Y I
Wh 7
wai-an I W ? l. &,' 'I D x
p,,1ll$&,~.;Q,n T i m.,, g.y pgS j~ q ~ " L' I A"InR uVQuyp, ji-- 4 h *ln Alm.Jj jgg
- g
'i c. l~ ~! y I v<I I l- -li ke.;h m p p ;In ulf } m. j f f ~. s w; m Me , g 2 l egw s ? 1 y 7 q.rxt cI .Ql q q l%s; .p: q nL I I n i.m w I 4. g~ 3 +p+ A
- m...
1 ~ - w. .n l g ~ 7l *. G ti c2 t$'. ? ? .hh l%. - I .l! n u) u%p' } 9 ._ a ; u a a y -j i %j ' u; e ._f s
- )
h j,_ f.U'4 y f [T U ~-l$ NA)i l-n n uo s s. y "_ 'i aja c -u .. ~ n - a Q o.~ n
- s n
a d 4. 4 I.'a ,a 2 f..' l S ho . ij I. {.. m.,Q A ' O, Lj . l... ll - l 1 n A d .b P-f!' l v h 'I r l es I .Y '9f p: N N D ', 4 N .[ 1 I
- r n
d.x, u a U . ~ g 01 t-lj ~p L L 7 / '! o w o r, . T .. q,,. _o = w 1.. \\ g ,,y ~j -l. ~r j - f i 7 l. c. 2 8 8 1 p<.; b . a...,} C
- -. d -
ti m
- ;. y
'grq -i w.- _r, y A
em w- +mm _ym o J l%NM 'l' 'l' 'I j i Ica -1 l( 19 DN l- =N/A / /V% ,- '\\/ 3 ' d! \\_%
- %4~
TT _ ~ Wm/% % M [. r ~ a., u r.vW herrW 1 i i ~ t', #J h6 i-@) N~ [' uAV ' // \\\\ N1 i; ~ e- 'k[ f ne ra pJ A.f. t p ft, 4 I i l~.. (n. t,Ja 5% bb hw Q f\\ 1(o l In [Y'.TJ., J) )&d W/ s f \\hs N ,\\N hh b 0 = j .m.m
- 1 v
m, L .(( (i \\h [q ~ '.l ')~ ',O d - .S_ i hd 1 i .- 6 s h k [% -;l\\ f=.n ' r%f' gy /4 s y 4 9 ci tw \\pJ hdd h f% ~~ $i -i [;o e an n" N7/ T/ i ~ = \\ ~; l !l M nNJ \\1 D IT N MCA' I M i ; i r i ra. p b;a ./ i n T ' N/%pf jk h#\\sh% N W Nh / l p
- s C
- .y.
47s p -hm WG hw r* _ f N) f 7773.T'M AA,f 6 :ps f( \\ N I ~.. ( ng, p l g %p ~ , 7. % i %. c s
- s. /~)
s 'd i y 8 I l y_ _, % __ s % v J% # s. /8 l ~ g: m n ' G2 l (3 L gy .N .b th 9 l g g n C p g g 2 l
- 2 g
G. 'D 1 w e -.. s. ni D ?, ti p 'd ci ! c.
- i C
p
- 1 ji
. U.._q di .-tj d -l I,J e _i i a a a o o e. b5 'n ' lj; 7 l U N ~O 1 M Lt n i y ij. j .g q a r: n [: i3 l i :;, 0 ti .L o p L' _a d ji j -" j t B . fi _ hi. a ' d p H d i i n R d M i
- (
9 "j N P W t;- ~ .n; i .o 3 . q w r o l] d .N ($ b, VJ u k u{$ Of l'.' b -y a 'd 3 i G i [... 4 l
/ .' / $Q ~! " SURVEY DATA SLEET Al'7 /' ' /,'/ NOTE: If nc,--ca ry-i; rMlwier rc sul tc i c g %f&t%rfiOG--M und/or the dese-rate 10- < Sr . n/6 5 A fq,s es g., Cfyhcdeec k,, pg g,, -va /W Location i d/n/100Cnd a:ter i d/.,/100Cn4 v,r. cmp T' I &V d / <> C 30 <' f o o b ff ! (/ cC 31 < /cc 3 l [g( - < /C. C' 32 < /cs 2) l / <,l. < /M/ 33 < /cc ?, /? % d /c C) 34 x /b o s b l 3/ </c > 35 < /0 e - Y; i /Y<d d /k& 36 1 <* / u n 4 3' 7/ d / sw 37 < f es O I [) [/C d' d / d> o 33 < /c o dC < /o u 3c }) ,1\\ n l /,klZ ( /c = 40 ) _9M ( /c o 41 l ri @ [ /c<) 42 ) l l d /C O 43 ____._ j { /" o 44 I I </ co 45 < /c v 4G _f N / 42 D 47 A n f l j_ _ l < / O c, 4S \\d _ l < // % > l _ 49 1 NO l < /e o So Q f N l < / LW 51 l \\ k /OO 52 \\ L_ <~ 53 </<<- $4 i__. < /o e 55 % l(N' Sb h I /"O 57 _ .\\v' l / 1 </w Sa 1 m / sy \\ / f' s s 'N,&& fM """~- &&5l[ $2lD/ </;;j l F
y aan,,r ,3,,/a sy v z ni s yo as-r sa w , sr r iPic e &' ewes (H6 AffAdW4 DMe)) v ,3 ~ 3Y /7 -r i n x t. c,s O ~, M , /9
- 2. o a/
b r .i e s K 7> 23 2-9 x i sy: ) k m j p L-zc [l 1 7, g 2-7 l t l l g y g< q r th is -j ,y r r o e e w 4 m w _!f. m @T
- L
'C52 s 225D C e6litt drelx 24 A/2 G-p,/
._m ,s p u a -m au. L p. .?.' % g .I 8' Georgia Institute of Technology 1 ~ NEELY NUCLEAR RESEARCH CENTER ECO ATLANTIC ORIVE ATLANTA GEORGIA 3o332-042S 1 ,'(i (404)DGJ 3 Goc d ATTACHMENT B August 24, 1987 .t i MDDRAt*DUM f To: Dr. R. A. Karam i FP?Mr Paul B. Sharpe, Health Physics Docon Supervisor i 3UBJECT: Cd-115 De5cntamination of Containment Building l l I This is to inform you of the current condition of tho j reactor top and containmene, building following decontamination efforts of the cd-t15 spill on 08/18/87. Dacon efforts in the form of masslinn copping, wot mopping, and wiping down woro concentrated in the areas of the reactor top, catwalk, control { room area, and the main floor. j j A disc smear survey of those areas conducted on 08/21/87 by Jamnes Cameron, Susan Selman, and myself shows the decon offorts i i to be a good suecoss. Attached are the entire results of tho peat decon surveys. Itoms to noto are that the uppor lovel [ 2 t l
- antainment building clean areas are less than 200 dpm/100 cm l
and the reactor top C-::ono is l3ss than 300 dpm/100 cm 2 except i ,ler_. na spot on top of the isotopo storage pigs which showed s3,2;i dpa/100 c.T.- The entire main floor of the containment i 2 j J' i.7:1' din; shows lass than 200 dpm/100 cm f I would also like to thank tho operations personnel for { cor,::arating so f ully with the health physics personnel londing j \\tothequickandofficientcloan-upofthespill. j i s l l p b'[h $7 9%/ YLug 3 h-h d '/ L J g ' b. f l cb o s q Pg 7k sod Yo d P s //N cd. 7%o cc M 'e f j~ l % ~ % () hA J2 ~ su g l 1 q
- w r* ** s s.. o, s o e
'.,4 y g,,, g,g y,4 g,,,ye W,,gy,
v. hg a I o e } .I m g see ) I h sh e O C.* O l' 6
- 1 3 a t t,:
\\ ',- 7,. O e[ ( d t)iI 3 i: 5 I c o o e, yi h *, k n g e F"9 h*; ,,.s ~ O \\< Hh a
- c c u, n c
-1 "'O e i .s a .,. f L 3 N
- )
~ 2) $5' a a i g &) " 2 21._ A f. p M' o, 4',r. ';f. N > ' '6/ [.- ll;i l c 'e ', l'J g i, 'e td .3 x-- ,l g s 'Q 7, s! + r s. l e s m : is )1 7 y le -\\P g { '%""9 W{( I .g } i s -- m.. - _ _ m _-. / \\
- y y
I s A ,M
- yf "I" y$h,%s r85 j
)y , Le '- l* 8
- ,0
- Q llb g%%Q, #G ll / \\ Om 3 h, j 4,. 9 .r A, l u 4,s i. '3 l 6.h sy / gD NQ4 *Mw^ i ;;p w .J f
a. I SURVEY DATA SLEET h, 1:0TC: If no entry is mado the smear resules is fh <100 d/m/100 cm and/or the doso rate is < 0.5 crem/hr 2 n 1 sc a t t.-n i d/n/100Cm' eren/hr Location l d/n/100Cm' mre 1 4 /o 0 d,6 30 -< / o o Mc _,2 I l 31 3 2.09 6 h _32 3 I 33 i, l i l / f h 34 / i l /03 I 35 d 4 too h 36 l ~ 1 l l 37 l / 39 l l 40 _ =. _ _ _ _ ' 9, l5? 41 .< / c o 42 l ti .j. i. / 43 1 3 I \\ \\ 44 Q J< a-o a,. / l 45 y ~ ~ l
- -8 l
46 0 i !g 0 _[_ 4 / <> o 47 J 2 79 48 lj I-a 0 '- l 49 i ,,, o o l l 50 I f 1 51 l l l 52 4 ) l l 53 I l 54 i _' i __ l U -- dl 55 ~~_, 15*O .3 __ 56 lo v " 4* 6 57
- _,_ _ _ \\ _
2 de d; 58 % %,4 W s ,g )t.l, 6 0 % ,wv sc ...,ri)'. 8 cpm \\ i
i
- . % n'sh Georgia Institute of Technology
- g' h
NEELY NUCLEAR RESEAACH CENTE A ( 900 ATLANTIC DATVE i m ATLANTA GEORGIA 3033D-0425 l ksw'/ (4caloo4 aco: ATTACHMENT C August 20, 1987 P l i l MEMORANDUM 70: Dr. R. A. Karam Robert M. Boyd, Manager, Office of Radiation Safety ',[fe e ' FROM:
SUBJECT:
Contaminati';n in NNRC Containment Building j i At or about-1:30 yesterday (08/19/87) Susan Selman (Health l I Physics Student Assistant) detected some unusual contamination M T-(approximately 400 c/m) on a masslinn smear survey on the main i floor insido the. NNRC containment building. She was making a I routino daily survey at the time. Sho reported her findings to Stavo Millspaugh and myself shortly thoroafter. A follow-up i t' survey was begun but was interrupted by the cmargency drill at '1 2:'2 P.M. While I was at Grady hospital with the drill scenario a more detailed follow-up survoy was mado in the contal.nment by i Pau*- Sharpo and the health physics staff. Gross contamination /" i was found on the floor on top of the reactor on a masslinn smear h (approximately 20 mrom/hr noar contact with a panoramic Ucta l cap off). I was told that Bill Downs on 08/18/07 had opened a l of topaz on top of the reactor, which had boon
- tivated in can the reactor, that woro wrapped in cadmium.
Apr..arently the ca hi n was highly contaminated and the smearable contaminato 63 cama semowhat airborno at this point. This probably explains t w:ty Susan discover ~* it on tho masslinn smear on the main floor, i Sebaoquent ovaluss. of the smear on a gamma analyzor showed d-115 as a major courco. I talked to you about this problem at i arcut 3:40, which you had boon informod of a little earlier. You a r.d Paul Sharpo ontored the containment building shortly aft >r wa talked about what further action to take and I don't all the facts beyond this point, but I understand Bill and havo ? oar, woro beginning to clean the floor when you 4.nd Paul arrived in the containment. The containment building was ovacuated l aftor como decon work was dono and tho door was labolod 4 ~ntaminated (Do Not Entor or words to this offect). f I l0 f%, peo l co ~ E l t. %....a.3,.c e, m..,, ..,,n,m:> l
'.' o..a t Bill Downs had some contamination on his clothing. A count r (3~) for approximately 5 minutes was made with a 3" NaI crystal against Bill's chest. A slight positive indication of Cd-115 was detected but was thought it might be external from his clothing. The same chest count on Dill was made first thing Thursday morning 08/20/07 and showed no activity above 9 background. A urine sample from Bill that was counted at 9:00 's A.M. showed r.3 unusual activity. ,g e... ;3 0,. m o C > More decon work was commenced in the containment under the Health Physics supervision of Paul Sharpe. By noon the top of 'i the reactor was down to approximately 10,000 d/m/100 cm and the main floor was generally 250 d/m/100 cm with the exception 'j-naar the blue cask next to the back side of the biological shield near the thermal column. Rea mmendatiens: Irradiated samples (especially thoce that are very racioactive) should not be opened on top of the reactor. These hot samples should be opened in the hood in a poly bag (bird neat style enclosed) while H.P. conitors. If they are too hot they should be opened remotely in the hot cell. Any time a ch nge in the radiation status of any area is suspected or found, Health Physics should be notified. O O
ye, s... 17 J-y zi,/pf ~ Scb 9 ATTACID!ENT D ( Cy/ ~ A# m,4,_ a m fa be& mm% wuit <sa as as cu d g er. f /9, /f f p. cJe du/-- Ae.<dct. ow ny 7 40 c~~ t.f y~cn r7'l-/y 4 t d i / t' 'b h[ .d g / O / G - rae fs & d ' mlq 7~x us sar W x A7facA-Wik -c Q G 6'k h.-sdee. e 0,1 aAd - /O Sa &<ms< ff m.,ja ca'at.AutaAr' 6~jd!dX:/ /e j ne,. \\ i i s ' ~~ 0 k t
.s. 0 .i Georgia Institute of Technology j NEELY NUCLEAA AESEAACH CENTER SOD ATUMTnC DANE ATLANTA. DEC AGtA SONE 25 J une 13, 1988 Dr. J. Nelson Grace U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission l Region II 101 Marietta Street, N.W. Atlanta, Georgia 30327
Dear Dr. Grace:
Reference:
NRC Inspection Report No. 50-160/87-07 and Subsequent Enforcement Action Taken by NRC We have been examining and reexamining issues and concerns raised by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission), Region II (RII) and by us concerning the past operation of the GTRR. We consider this self-evaluation to be vital in the process of establishing a firm foundation for both safe and efficient operation of tne facility. Reflection on past events and careful study of the pertinent facts has led us to conclude that several very important matters l continue to be cloaked with uncertainty, We believe that RII may have in its possession information which, if shared with GTRR management, would enhance the mafe operation for wnich we jointly strive, as well as improve compliance with Commission requirements in the future. Wo believe tnat RII's providing this information to I the GTRR management would be conwistent with the mission of the NRC and would have a positive impact on the public health and safety. Three situations arose during the course of the inspection, investigation, and enforcement action which continue to be a cource of confusion which RII could possibly help resolve. In the following paragraphs pertinent background information is provided for each situation followed by questions. We would be most l appreciative if you could give us answers which would help us t resolve existing uncertainty a;id confusion. t Situation 1 On January 22, 1988, an exit interview was held by the NRC with GTRR management. On the morning of that day the Manager of the Office of Radiation Safety (MORS) provided to the Director, Neely Nuclear Research Center (NNRC), a record of smear surveys taken in the NNRC in the month of August, 1987. This was the first time 1 hi n i iI ~ -. _ - -
l *. l l Dr. J. Nelson Grace June 13, 1988 Page 2 these records had been produced for the Director's evaluation and use. These surveys included the August 19, 1987 survey taken one day after the cadmium spill. After study of the surveys, the Director asked the MORS if the survey had been provided to the NRC Radiation Specialist Inspector who conducted the RII inspections of l December 16, 1987, January 4-5, and 14-22 1988. The MORS replied i that the inspector was told that the smear survey existed, but that the inspector had not specifically asked for a copy of it nor had l he examined it. l The exit interview of January 22, 1988 was attended by the RII i l Deputy Regional Administrator, The Section Chief responsible for GTRR, the aforementioned Radiation Specialist Inspector and a Reactor Physics qualified Inspectors GTRR personnel attending were the Georgia Tech Vice President for Research, the Director and the Associate Director, NNRC, and the Georgia Tech Director of Research Communications. Immodiately after the exit interview, tne press interviewed (in the following order) the Deputy Regional Administrator, RII, the Georgia Tech Vice President for Research and the Director, NNRC. The Director, NNRC, provided the August 19, 1987, smear survey to the press. It showed that the cadmium spill was limited to the top of the reactor. It was our impression that the Deputy Regional Admin.strator, RII, was surprised and somewhat taken back by this information. On that day, January 22, 1988, the Section Chief for the GTRR understood that the Deputy Regional Administrator wanted to know why this significant survey information had not been provided to the Radiation Specialist Inspector at the time the inspection was l conducted. He also asked that a copy of the survey be provided to RII. Attachment A to this letter is a copy of the response mailed to RII on January 22, 1988. Note that it contained the smear survey of August 19, 1987 as well as a copy of the survey performed on the residence of the Senior Reactor Operator (SRO) who caused the spill on the top of the reactor, i l The August 19, 1987, survey indicated that no contamination was found on the catwalk (location 99 on the second floor), on the ground floor, on the second floor including the s *.e p-o f f pad next to the reactor top, or on the first floor except for location (97) l directly below the spor where the cadmium can was opened. Location f 07 is an area of about 10 ft-sq where contamination levels of 100-200 cpm above background were measured. NRC Inspection Report (IR) No. 50-160/87-08 is based on inspections starting some four months later on December 16, 1987, January 4-5 and 14-21, 1988. It is stated on page 6 of the report, j "The Inspector reviewed licensee records or weekly gross radiological surveys conducted during August (sic) 1987. For the Aug us t 19, 1987 (sic) survey, only the south main floor area
Dr. J. Nelson Grace June 13, 1988 Page 3 (location 7), directly beneath the top of the reactor shield area where the experiment material was handled, indicated radiation levels approximately 100-200 cpm above background." Questions: l 1. Did the MORS or other Of fice of Radiation Saf ety (ORS) personnel in fact inform the Radiation Specialist Inspector of the existence of the August 1987 survey document or its contents? 2. Did the Inspector ask to see all pertinent records and if so were they provided to him fot' his inspection? 3. If the Radiation Specialist Inspector did not see the August 19, 1987, smear survey as' claimed by the Deputy i Regional Administrator and Section Chief responsible for i the GTRR, how could the description of the survey results l (as described above in IR 50-160/87-08) appear in the report? It is clear that the information could not have J come f rom f acts provided by NNRC at the related Enforcement Conference, since that conference is not referenced in the IR. It is stated on page 6 of the referenced IR, "In the afternoon of August 19, 1987, radioactive contamination, approximately 100-200 counts per minute (cpm) above background, was found on the I first (main) floor of the reactor containment building during i routine surveillance activities. Discussion with cognizant f licensee health physics staff indicated that followup surveys of the licensee facilities showed radioactive contamination in the south to southwest areas of the reactor containment building including the floor area on top of the reactor shield near the storage pigs; the main floor and on equipment located there; and at the same elevation as the top of the reactor shield." i Questions 1 f I 4. What documents contained the above referenced 100-200 cpm above background levels on the containment (main) floor? 4 5. Which documents contained the followup surveys? j 6. Were any results conveyed verbally (without contemporaneous l of ficial documentation backup) to the Radiation Specialist i Inspector? By Whom? What results? 1 l It is stated on page 6 of the IR, "From discussion with cognizant l l licensee representatives the inspector determined that from l l 1
Dr. J. Nelson Grace June 13, 1988 Page 4 approximately one-fourth to one-third of the reactor containment building had measurable contamination above background levels." Questions 7. Given the obvious conflict between the inspector's determination and the August 19, 1987 survey, how and based on what informatLon did the inspector determine that approximately ene-fourth to one-third of the reactor containment building had measurable contamination? 8. What amount of measurable contamination was found? Who found it? GTRR has no records of surveys taken at the time which indicated a large, as opposed to very small, spread of contaminacion. Subsequent surveys taken in late January,1988, included ventilation ducts (never cleaned before), filters, vertical walls and louvers of ventilation ducts in close proximity to the area of the August spill. None of these surveys showed any traces of cadmium. A memorandum f rota a technician in the ORS dated August 24, 1987, to The Director, NNRC, stated in the opening paragraph, "Decon efforts in the form of masslinn mopping, wet mopping, and wiping down were concentrated in the areas of the reactor top, catwalk, control room area, and the main floor." This statement implies that those areas were cleaned because they were contaminated, perhaps heavily. Nonetheless, the survey of August 19, 1987, showed no contamination on the catwalk, control room area or the main floor except for the 100-200 cpm above background at area 67 directly below the spot where the cadmium can was opened. No other information concerning pre-decontamination levels is provided by the memorandum. The MORS, in a memorandum to the Director, NNRC, dated August 20, 1987, (Attachment C) refers to unusual contamination of 400 cpm on the main floor. This 400 cpm is, according to the MORS, the same as the 100-200 cpm above background reported for area 97 in the August 19, 1987, survey, since the normal background in the containment is taken to be approximately 100 cpm, it is unexplained how the 400 cpm number was obtained. Questions 9. Is the NRC aware of any supporting documents which indicate, contrary to our best information, that the catwalk, the control room area or the main floor or any other area of the main floor (other than area 47) required decontamination?
Dt. J. Nelson Grace June 13,1988 Page 5
- 10. Are there any documents which support the numbers provided in the memorandum from the MORS?
(The preceding questions bear on the safety of the operation of the GTRR in that it has become increasingly important to verify the completeness of surveys and other information provided by former ORS personnel. Since this information and these records are used in the daily operation of the facility as background and as referents, it bears directly on the f acility's safe operation.) Situation 2 On March 18, 1988, the MORS demanded of us that: "Georgia Tech will pay all lawyer's fees and associated expenses that I have incurred and will incur in the future in my efforts to protect my welfare in the face of harassment, intimidation, demotion and slander that I have been subjected to in the past eighteen months." We are totally unaware of what it is that is supposed to have occurred 18 months earlier which would have led the MORS to feel a need for an attorney. Even the reorganization of the NNRC was not contemplated in October, 1986. RII may have helpful information about ORS personnel actions to disrupt the new organization of NNRC. These actions may have l' persisted even aftsr issuance of an order by Georgia Tech's President to impl9 ment the change. RII knowledge and of course tecat acceptance of the change is found in IR No. 50-160/87-08, pages 12-13. We assumed that RII was also aware that ORS personnel attempted to f urther disrupt Georgia Tech's management and organization and separate the ORS from NNRC. The Georgia Tech student newspaper, "The Technique", was the device used to publish both articles and letters dealing 'sith disruptive actions to both management and organization witnin the Institute, j Questions
- 11. Did RII or the Of fice of Investigations (01) investigate the possibility of personnel of the ORS deliberately i
I misleading NRC inspectors as to the impact of the August spill?
- 12. Did RII make any attempt to independently verify (for example, through the use of official records, required by i
the NRC to be maintained by the licensee) just how accurate i o inaccurate the information provided by personnel of the ORS was? .. - - - _ -., = -,.. -
Dr. J. Nelson Grace June 13, 1988 Page 6
- 13. If such an investigation was performed, when was it done and what were its findings?
Note: It can be demonstrated that members of the ORS were unhappy about the reorganization. The motive for this is unclear, but it may be related to the increased pressure put on the ORS after the reorganization by the Director, NNRC, to both perform in accordance with NRC and State Requirements and to appropriately document that performance. Subsequent audit of the ORS activities prior to the replacement of the MORS and other ORS personnel indicates the possibility of at least negligence if not malfeasance, in the performance of required duties. This information is safety related for reasons previously described above, and also may indicate the necessity for cautious evaluation of data collected by these individuals. Situation 3 Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations, section 2.202.c states: "When the Deputy Executive Director for Regional Operatibns or the Deputy's designee finds that the public health, safety, or interest so requires, or that the violation is willful, the notice of violation may be omitted and an order to show cause issued." The order to show cause is specified in 10CFR2.202, restated below for convenience (a) 1he Executive Director for Operations during an emergency as determined by the EDO, and Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Director of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, Deputy Executive Director for Regional Operations, or the Deputy's designee and Director, Office of Administration and Resource Management, as appropriate may institute a proceeding to modif y, suspend, or revoke a license or for suen other action as may be proper by serving on the licensee an order to show cause which wills (1) Allege the violations with which the licensee is charged, or the potentially hazardous conditions or other f acts deemed to be suf ficient ground for the proposed action. (2) Provide that the licensee may file a written answer to the order under oath or affirmation within twenty (20) days of its date, or such other time as may be specified in the order;
Dr. J. Nelson Grace June 13, 1988 Page 7 (3) Inform the licensee of his right, within twenty (20) days of the date of the order, or such other time as may be specified in the order, to demand a hearing: (4) Specify the issues; and (5) State the effective date of the order. (6) A licensee may res' pond to an order to show cause by filing a written answer under oath or affirmation. The answer shall specifically admit or deny each allegation or cha'ge made in tne order to show cause, and may set forth the matters of fact and law on which the licensee relies. The answer may demand a hearing. (c) If the answer demands a hearing, the commission will issue an order designating the time and place of hearing. (d) An answer or stipulation may consent to the entry of an order in substantially the form proposed in the order to show cause. (e) The consent of the licensee to the entry of an order shall constitute a waiver by the licensee of a hearing, findings of fact and conclusions of law, and of all right to seek Commission and judicial review or to contest tne validity of the order in any forum. The order shall have the same force and effect as an order made after hearing by a presiding officer or the Commission." On January 20, 1988, the Order to Modify the Georgia Tech License was issued without being preceded by an Order to Show Cause. The regulations in 10CFR2.201 and 2.202 appear to provide opportunity for the licens(3 to answer charges raised under any pretense and regardless of accuracy. This opportunity was not af forded to Georgia Tech. On several occasions, individual RII personnel have been overheard to say that the NRC operates under the philosophy of "you are guilty until proven innocent." We find it hard to believe, of course, that this could be more than an expession of individual opinion as opposed to official NRC philsophy. Questions: 14. Considering the following:
- a Dr. J. Nelson Grace June 13, 1988 Page 8 a.
Documented surveys show that no contamination left the containment building; b. The spill was limited to primarily the reactor top and did not meet reportability criteria; c. The SRO involved was not subjected to internal contamination; and d. The public and NNRC personnel were in no danger; What chain of reasoning caused RII and the NRC to issue an Order to Modify rather than an Order to Show Cause as is required by the regulations? 4
- 15. Is it the policy and practice of the NRC to assume 3
q guilt or were these utterances unauthorized and mistalten impressions? The mission of the NRC as we understand it and support it, is to protect the public welfare and national defense. GTRR is a unique facility, deemed exceptional in promise by the National Academy of Science. In the areas of medical uses of atomic energy as well as the potential for both defense related and pure research, the facility is a national resource. For these reasons, o GTRR management believes that the answers to the questions it has posed are in the national interest as well as in tne interest of the facility. Your response to these important questions within a reasonable period, say, 30 days, would be gratefully appreciated. It has been indicated by RII personnel that the Region would provide safety related information, regardless of its source, in order to protect the public health and safety and carry out the mission of the NRC. As you are aware, consideration of the future of GTRR is ongoing and this information would be helpful in providing a clearer picture of the events of the past few months in order that appropriate remedial steps can be taken. It is our earnest hope that this letter be taken not as impertinent, hostile, or argumentative but in the spirit of opening new, clearer and more candid communication between RII and Georgia Tech. In the long run the openness will, we believe, best serve :he public interest and the respective missions of NRC and Georgia.ech. As with all official communication, prompt inclusion of this doc ument in our docket file would be appreciated. Sincerely, pc Dr. J.P. Crecine Dr. T.E. Stelson g, fme-Dr. R. Fuller R.A. Karam Director RAK jlr
ex /( ~ Georgia Institute of Technology 8 b NEELY NUCLEAR AESEAACH CENTEA i,/^ ,/ 900 ATLANTIC C ANE \\,, ATLANTA GEC AGIA 30332 0 225 ','4_. '[ \\ (404) 004 3 GOO ATTACHMENT A lanuary 22, 1998
- . Paul Fredrickscn
';:: car.R ;ulat:ty Cc.r.Mssion .;;cn I: .:arietta Street, N.W. A nta, Ce:rgia 30323
- t t:r. Fredricksent En:1cscJ pica:: find results of smcar surveys taken during the
- :h :! August. Also ir.:1uiel is the survey of Mr. Downs aparecent c2 1/11.'i3.
- ashci ::r. ::yd atout why thosc results were not g: van to you u::::ct.
- i s a n s war wa s t ha t.t.*r. Ku zo wa s in!crmc1 a bou t them Luc d1J
.: spc:1f;; ally ask for them.
- ;;u hava ar.y :;uestions please let ce k.:cw.
San:cccly y:urs, / n J
- 7 N % e., % _
R. A. Karam . :; a 2 2 2 3 :.'.*cr. t s ( 3) gg m
4 9 .[ M ,t..i o O 3' 6 f z a : 1.* 2 i \\ t 3 ? 1 e 0 pv .,s...- ~ la t** ) e y
- '*r,.
...} ~y e- > a - _ q n-m l 1 ( l I f 9 e a 1 ( l y g 'i f f.; l 0 i, [. ', _.'.d* 2*.), $,.d v /tO(l I/ I s o q age g,'.j 3: L 2.k Olhalli,l.- 1:, c' '---,=~~--,,-:- n t 4: ~!$,, l 9 m;g s,i f 5 1 D i
- dih} w,.
T' s 3 P ( g ,d e. 4. J __U ": 4. t r vL., rtx , __:rt._[ m; t %L t ;p gs n,g ypj g r c ~, 1ce f C le=d l o 5 g j-EJ. > c, s s W
- w
",.2. k,-e. A E ] T/ ) ;yri g ! g % ~rD. i _.: 2_.- 3 l
- r w.{-l\\-l-QQ g.4i-
- w._.,.y' i /M '
~7~ L1 ~q%'s n ~ 4 D )A O ) 1 ..s[5 l / s @M;M@ i ? / I w\\(,A / b t\\ f ~ ~ s_.. gu "'"".sh E I
ef W 9 y l 1 8 V a el I w 1
- (
D. e g ty O \\. e :
.
.2= m ~ CC e -1 0 m .b l I , _C
- t=
E 3Nlr .c 5 . v i 2-r
- =.'
i j .x t l$ )* I he A ..L i .i t1 8 N! e j s: ) 7~ 1 i l i 3 4 .'] j 4 8 ,I l l 4 i i i lMi!~i!hlL il g i {.h ,) 1 t'.t N Ir .iI t!Il s i o 1 { E l .t s Q 4 b
Z q\\ 0 I"3 3 w c W d % sd tJ O e pk f w i E l IeJ E w = 2 m.. -. ,y -w ~ ' i [" ' 3 'I 1 { f I 1 { f i 0 1 y a Y; i i 1 g >:' !. i 1 i i 3 1 i' 1-r 3 3 1
- 'b'
-J W !4 5 c cm ],IL g "I j 8 j f l ?. 7 g Jl 0
- "=#5 '^
i 4 S b ~NL) ]A 4 - ] LW;[Y% . m%2!rl t. i 4 l 'l Jl J' 7 l 18,j ) } C b' ) j' s h' ' 5 ? l 5 I .l' f j, L' 0 g-r- a -y. f! s i. y I'! l T i '3 l }*- 7 '( ms b__L y, a 4 t NI i [ .i j n m ,t, j v ,
- f
~,f,, h k / - t o i M h as
- lf,[
'b O l I [. S N,8ab bl m ? Xg/ o g.,a N-r, 1 / Q ,V p/I; g e d ' (g), / ) I 0g A h... o = \\' 1.s $, 1- -== t.g,, \\ x a i my > ;o
- b>N 1
O 0 J U
I ) 14 i1 i' {l-]**) ) j lea !!.Y !!A*.I.!!.:4 SLIP.'IT lil' ORT 2 i I'l**1 x 1000 DATE MU!!Til: b i t-izqk =*d AREA 1 2, 3 4 5 6 7 8 9, 10 11 12 13 14, 15 16._17 18 19, 20 21, 22 23
- 24. 25 26 27 28 _29, 30 31 I
LI 'I 1 LI' @
- I
/ d, <f df 2 Q <\\ <t h zg / l.s %f ,\\ } cl c\\ [ ,{ {3 7 c\\ V ,./A7 ..\\ %f <r c) h/ <( t i. c, 4 Q it W 'l ' '-\\ f?R Cf Cl / %,l \\, ~ f th 4l L1 c,Y at d &\\ h[ <l .c{\\f,(
- 5 f
q A n A ec rc ~ 4 ,f \\
- r
<f /\\ ct Y 7 b '\\ ll N3 Y Y
- l g
el cl 41 I Y M gi [( 4 of { 4 4 4 V Lt d ') i\\ } A h) <1 <\\ L1 a 10 4 'I M f) d
- 5 4
1 j 31 7 V tr # ti ~\\ 4 <1 %f <f ci ) . Q 4 d .[ t <k g{
- l CI
{ 13 b p u L s.x pp4<4: gf. ~ gg y/r Readings: i Elank - Readings not taken l 4 Check - Insignificant Count f k D1t : / ] ~ [' 1 A:..uninn an ef ficiency of 10% f or t he / h( l Cc1ger Counter wit ti I*.mc.ske. \\ Radiological Safety Officer 6 3 z. m eg., s,. a c. -- c_.+ x
_s-a g _yg g , [_m -+ N. l {l O 9 D H J NID( I 8 L-o7%J4 A #iNfm W %M I ' l: l :l "l 'M Jl l 1 .n W A !~ nl, w% f %WE% %f ' ~ r; -I- .nr aawo.xu ~! i~ -l M n+ >v L~ elrole !k+)V#% M-1a art ~ 1, n;, m ImnlAN A L~ 9 Wrep. lw4 i >MrMhNhWN HN, etn; ^iy r; i i 1 vl m. A '" ' i ' " LN ml i~ N erWM& .jy i7! j WNA W . Si jy.TQ 'l g,-lml ncKx9mXley3v i. l 1% l A )\\ /A 'i, ' { i:. = l% nM 'l 1 WY l. w', y s 7ij;; - = [(+ \\nd-.=Iw! #_.%Iwmvst A v y
- >1_,
M T,' ' I Inam\\ fly c A A' l-J J l'L I 1 1 ? M WINLIA A Q y,,' I UN J. J#\\ ] i m v v M I-* _ Nfl%W WA L r< V A l i J {~ -l,;' wlh vtI N f vt y m.n _ T n J.ll$ Vl lPN L- ~i~:~ l w I I 1 L- - l.-.lr. S a l n W h sr A -In~l M \\\\/. ] ,"' ~;' w= 1i ...:.;e,n l \\w n,t i V[ M ^ u, 3
- k
.z.fi%L _ s o f I'- 'I' b l l },,- , [__ l (;.e3Mgm bM2 g i I l t- ., ~ w&wK y i l ) T 3-i a j l t y 1 Lf -_l
- h r
v% ii ~r i l ~ o L. Id ,' C) d,, G ) g \\ S . -u l-. S ' -2 i \\ .l_C. l -0 a u , 4 ,. < =i - 0 'W 0 4 - .. g .;4 ; %.3 5 a \\ N
- y R - s - W. +,
..y p _g -d .c } a a . e, .j N h '.2 k~ 6 ,-..i f . N. ,I ,I ,<\\ u e ..g n ~ I m o ..i l E h e l 's
- j
!} ~ d' ' a e 'd '*"$ -d{ -h -j - - - 4 5- \\ g l -g M. g i y ul n m .. g _. = 5j_1. r! a 8 - o u N l q._ g. ii -.fJ i j i a- .p .s 'C Du C
- '" ~
is p_-
- i-m..
.ege_ ..,w,, e ] l l l l l I"' - l-s '[I N 2 HON Mk [ \\M YDN MkIYY i b/ N7 %7 NA < T/%AA T.l.',~ ' ' V I! i Is t su w W t htwM XV i o e. Lasl DO Nd Y[kM d UY A mJ e mAAU \\/ i i se AB O, ,,l l N.m _ t1
- t%I P'M Db hJs.l kl JN i
V fseyas r aJ W AN Ei m
- ~ m% / %f W Vf k% A) MNf R
~ ~
- .... A#mAwV# NAV/\\ _. l. _
~l nc M mf iM MFY MA ' l Cl i n -i n V W V ~ ' R 3. ho i i 2 , o.- s. w. ma 4t Arh A 'i T]i_ c i _ " - = rw Nd hN \\fV Y ~ i m A ,~ AIA t *. m IF-E V N#A #'%r X /UQ ..[ m A KARA ed i -yr mr %y ~ I :- e1 < m um uu icta v v i - l.W n a - \\ ^ NJ
- 4 A
T ~~ i i Y
- j I~ " P V
- " AV g
fl Ei 6 nNJ mJ h+ hvJg[\\ I I i - W' V, J.< nq ,\\ J OM Af t ~%/ VR% /%fA'tf i '~ i PA p mMT \\Mk #AVA p.. c.v %A g ~ i O +.,-cwMy v !'JM L 6b,M j t f lD N A O j,m j, g y y 5 M f ~, N' %(
- 4 A
i [. %r VV i A A A __h _ _ V
- 7Af Q
~ .L n a p j ,o g g .c '9 7. Ej _3 3) M w ..m i g e n a U n
- y i n e
s . e. .P r W A _. d _g __ #y.__.?, g a...
- u. -,'
~ O l .e u 3 x ~y o c, .a a n O b g ? b! b I O 'e y i j' .j 4 .._ Q y. .g . g M 7' x a 4 1 - x x u 2' M C C:2 h p. a a o 6 p-i 3 g I d b 6 -['j u I M E -N- - !3 r = a L = m o I d E U.. _ "y d ~ a E t ~ .o 5. n _-a w _k y t = = u a o 1 a a u N b ~ i k b t. i i } I m j
V ~ ! ' * -SURVEY DATA SIEET AM n '/ %vs um.v{v mir gM ^ the 0r.::s re 3@.-t e is -49 If e--p tr NOE: ano,ror 6ac vase rate is ' O, e m h f4 n os td e. f'q,3 e q, g e 1 Cfy frcle,_ p,, p,, 1 a :1-. I d/./100Cnd -ere-A r l Location d/n/100CM %g ?' I b( (/CQ 30 c'. to o b I 5'I d / ce C 31 < /c.o [- l /kg".- < /c C 32 < /cs '[, l /d d /rc 33 < / (. C f, i f_1G d /c W 34 < / b c. [s l 3/ </ou 35 < /G o ' ?; i fy<cC < WO 36 '</^ ~ gs 7, / d / c' u 37 < l o.a I [) fj,4' & d /d><> 33 <, /c o bC d /' G 39 }) 0 l [ 9 i l / 4% ( / c t> 40 i 'fI/- ( /e> o 41 d EC-- W /t.<1 42 1 I d /c 0 43 l ( /v n 44 I I /00 45 I 4 /_c c-46 l N / c;- 47 A m \\ < /o c, 4s S \\d s9 l <S1 49 L I <' ir. o I 50 i N \\ < ns: 51 I ~ < / oc> 52 l i < /c o 53 </v l 54 c-f < f o c-I l < stm $6 l i -< m > $7 / l \\J V 1 -< /vv $8 [/ "M M 4" I M )) L ~ Y. * / r s /,,.. < < r d w jf.]cefde A cl ? r ty,.dt C44744Lfw&.wam 9 3, g y p,g g g
I' $ h waJ W 'O'** ('l; ay w e a r - ~ a,s> v -v ~- p s, ( / k 9g an .p t- ~ F%e g 2., b 37 k /f 30 2/ ,y t s, s y 7, > 33 2-Y \\ ( }O NI I t / q j] l, nD' b l
- 4 o_ to r>-
"\\ i l 9 g g ( i} l o n L -l r m 1 1 s a
- 3 a
sa gc+y e ce ee, \\ ]250 0 CGffL. -- - l$ Y bd ^ fr
.. o .p,m I pf* g h Georgia Institute of Technology NEELY NUCLEAR RESEAACH CENTE A O..,,p, f, j l/ SCO ATLANTIC CRIVE ATLANTA GECAG!A 30333-0 32S (4caj ood.300< ATTACHMENT B August 24, 1987 MIM3RANDUM ?S: Dr. 3. A. Karam 0' 7a0Mr Paul B. Sharpe, Health Physics Decon Supervisor 3'JBJECT : Cd-115 De5cntamination of Containment Building This is to inform you of the current condition of the
- ea::or sep and containment building following decontamination afforts of the cd-ll5 spill on 08/18/87.
Decon efforts in'the f orm of : asslinn mopping, wet mopping, and wiping down were i c:: 2ntrated in the areas of the reactor top, catwalk, control roen area, and the main floor. A disc smaar survoy of those areas conducted on 08/21/07 by Jamnes Ciraron. Susan Selman, and myself shows the decon efforts l a 52 a good success. Attached are the entire results of the p:st decon surveys. Item: to note are that the upper level
- ..tainment bailding clean areas are less than 200 dpm/100 cm:
ud tne reactor top C-:eno is less than 300 dpm/100 cm 2 exeopg ,1Or..:na spot on top of the isotopo storage pigs which showed s:*,l'.i do.m/100 cm' The entire main floor of the containment 2 ' i7. !Oin'; shows lass than 200 dpm/100 cm I would also like to thank the operations personnel for I
- 2rsting so fully with the health physics porconnel lending
\\ o ;ho quick and efficient eloan-up of the spill. i %W c b as, m 3 % Pg 7Lm r%_ Sled b yco d p s fm cy, r/g va4 um - wq kw io g J - D'
- *A 3.. n 9 k'.---. (
- t-
r.
- -7_---_----------------------
- . ~,.
e e i i,
- i e
YU Si 3' ., u A .g;,4 m ti E i ~ [ r 4 2 i T, eo :- l O i I t /% %N 't 4,. c. i dt .c s,.o,an o. g -= c ..o x ,. / .gt 9{ w.. g = M f s Nh'p vk,, it 1 ) 'l / i .y s. \\ ( b) , t. I 'l 3-g.- i I ^ l / b'l f ^^(.i.j, % c t ll 0) W ) 49-7 \\ \\ p \\ .) l t I
SURVEY DATA SfEET ~ h NOT::: Ifnoentryisgadothesmearresultsis fh <100 d/m/100 cm and/or the doso rate is < 0.5 mrem /hr t i - ati-1 i d /n / I MCnd erem/hr Locatie'1 d/m/100Cm' at I i 4/00
- e6 30
</o o .4 i l-31 3 2.o S l l i l 3 l 32 f 33 I I h l 34 I /03 } 35 4 1 G C) l 36 \\ l l f 37 I l / 3s I f / 39 I Q l 40 I I /3 ? l. 41 1 - /0 0 42 l o l l 43 I i \\ 44 Q,,. a. I l G b l l 45 y 3a
- ,3 l
l 46 d l l 47 3's l / -i.>o c78 I cs q l l' l \\ gg c, n a l I 50 I -l l 51 I f 52 l l 53 I \\ _/ 55 i w D tous
- 4. 5
$7 l di SS w ~ % e.a } s )4.b;. <= _. i e.' s [, L fO..t e ; t')
- CJ IM j
t
- ' Q' Georgia institute of Technology I'
f
- d.,,.*
NEELY NUCLEAR RESEAACH CENTE A 900 ATLANTIC CALVE b-, = ATLANTA. GEORGIA 30332-0425 k, (4L'4)OD4 303C sog * '3 ATTACHMENT C August 20, 1987 j MEMORANDUM T3: Dr. R. A. Karam Boyd, Manager,OfficeofRadiationSafety',89y'e FROM: Robert M. SU3 JECT: Contamination in NNRC Containment Building At or about 1:30 yesterday (08/19/87) Susan Selman (Health Fnysics Student Assistant) detected some unusual contamination f ?
- T-(approximately 400 c/m) on a masslinn smear survey on the main floor inside the NNRC containment building.
She was making a l routina daily survey at the time. She reported her findings to l S: va M111spaugh and myself shortly thereafter. A follow-up ( drill at i O',+ s.:rvey was begun but was interrupted by the emergency t 2:,'2 ?.M. While I was at Grady hospital with the drill scenario a moro detailed follow-up survey was made in the containment by Paul Sharpe and the health physics staff. Gross contamination was found on the floor on top of the reactor on a masslinn smear 'w (approximately 20 mrem /hr near contact with a panoramic Beta cap off1. I was told that Bill Downs on 08/18/07 had opened a of topaz on top of the reactor, which had been activated in i ran the reactor, that were wrapped in cadmium. Apprarently the l
- ).1.- i n was highly contaminated and the smearable contaminate
!came semewhat airborne at this point. This probably explains v'y Susan discovered it on the masslinn smear on the main floor. l aS.2 sequent evaluation of the smear on a gamma analyzer showed 03-115 as a major source. I talked to you about this problem at about 3: 40, which you had been informed of a little earlier. You and Paul Sharpo entered the containment building shortly i aftir wa talkad about what further action to take and I don't hava all the facts beyond this point, but I understand Bill and 'can are beginning to clean the floor when you and Paul arrived in the containment. The containment building was evacuated I after some decon work was done and the door was latolod
- ntaminated (Do Not Enter or words to this effect).
j t O
- d
( L .} c> f .s.an e u o..,a... m ;.,,,...
t a.. Bill Downs had some contamination on his clothing. A count d (f for approximately 5 minutes was made with a 3" NaI crystal against Bill's chest. A slight positive indication of Cd-115 was detecte.d but was thought it might be external from his clothing. The same chest count on Bill was made first thing Thursday morning 08/20/87 and showed no activity above ? background. A urine sample from Bill that was counted at 9:00 -:J A. !!. showed rio unusual activity. 4,...., n... i - Ca.. More decon work was commenced in the containment under the Health Physics supervision of Paul Sharpe. By noon the top of 'd the reactor was down to appro.ximately 10,000 d/m/100 cm and the j# main floor was generally 250 d/m/100 cm with the exception i naar the blue cask next to the back side of the biological shiold near the thermal column. Reccm.tendat ions : Irradiated samples (especially those that a r e. very racioactive) should not be opened on top of the reactor. Those hot sampics should be opened in the hood in a poly bag (bird nest style onclosed) while H.P. monitors. If they are too hot they should be opened remotely in the hot cell. Any time a change in the radiation status of any area is suspected or found, Health Physics should be notified. O O
~, 4.- g., 17 J-ipipf ~ dbb 9 o m w a ur o n ang n AcA "Sch wua. e4 wa m d y r-f li, /f$7 ut d=/- of 7 .n. ~ e h an 4, cw t.( 9 y <.. l $ w b/ l .-3 f Y' Y hl O s 4 j l O / ^.:- 44W fW (x/' <Q -flW.
- 7 m7au4L e.~ z%. sd
- xM
? gyfc e &?rz W S =/ - % l* k-< C e ?' 2 c x /#facA-?6?n.g kI s-6?:a s e # d % d . LAt (xn -ezsu-m a/Mc &. x / / / ff W I l 'NN O i i r b .}}