ML20206P299

Responds to NRC Re Violations Noted in Insp Rept 50-062/98-202.Corrective Actions:Correct Name for Content Matl Being Shipped Is Now Typed Onto All Shipping Forms

ML20206P299
Person / Time
Site:	University of Virginia
Issue date:	01/07/1999
From:	Mulder R VIRGINIA, UNIV. OF, CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA
To:	NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM)
References
50-062-98-202, 50-62-98-202, NUDOCS 9901110122
Download: ML20206P299 (5)

Text

_ . -.

e UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA NuCitAR REACTOR fACHITY

' U.S. Mall ADDRESS STREET ADDRESS PO. Box 3425 675 Old Reservoir Road University Station Charlottesville, VA 22903 Charlottesville, VA 22903 Tek phone: 804-982-5440 Fax: 804-982 5473 January 7,1999 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATTN: Document Control Desk Washington D.C.

20555 Re: Reply to a Notice of Violation, as per NRC Inspection Report No. 50-62/98-202 dated December 9,1998, for the University of Virginia Reactor (UVAR), License No. R-66, Docket No. 50 62.

Gentlemen:

Pursuant to the provisions of 10CFR2.201, please find enclosed a written statement in reply to NRC Inspection Report No. 50-62/98-202 and its enclosed Notice of Violation. Should further information be desired, please contact me at (804) 982-5440.

Cay / County ot h k*o C Si r Cornmonwealth of Virginia l l hereby certify that the attached document is a true and

' exact copy of a b b/

(tyre el occumen0

presented before M tL Robert U. Mulder, Director me this I day cf deu ' ;19W -

U.Va. Nuclear Reactor Facility by j O ?f/ [g[ I '

dc& Ws Le eum enc:

My commission expires NRC Notice of Violation and Reply to a Notice of Violation O3,!Y [DA -

cc:- Mr. Craig Bassett, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Region II,61 Forsyth St. SW, Suite 23T85, Atlanta, Ga. 30303 l  !

9901110122 990107 e b

f

DR ADOCK 0500006a Ol PM Q l

1

1

. 1 Notice of Violation University of Virginia Docket No. 50-62 University of Virginia Research Reactor License No. R-66 During a NRC inspection conducted on November 16-19,1998, a violation ofNRC requirements was identified. In accordance with the " General Statement of Policy and Procedure for NRC Enforcement Actions," NUREG-1600, the violation is listed below:

10 CFR 71.5(a) requires that a licensee who delivers licensed material to a carrier for transport comply with the applicable requirements of the regulations appropriate to the mode of transport of the Department ofTransponation (DOT) in 49 CFR Parts 171-189.

49 CFR 172.202(a)(1) requires that the proper shipping name prescribed for the material in Column 2 of the 172.101 Table be included on the shipping papers.

49 CFR 172.204(a) requires that a specific certification or declaration stating that the material is offered in accordance with the regulations be included on the shipping papers. Paragraph 172.204(c) specified a certification statement that may be used in place of the one required by paragraph (a) if the material is to be transported by air.

49 CFR 173.422(a) requires that excepted packages containing limited quantities ofradioactive material otTered for shipment must be certified as being acceptable for transportation by having a specific notice enclosed in or on the package.

10 CFR 71.12(c) (2) requires that, under the terms ofgeneral license for an NRC-approved package, a licensee shall comply with the terms and conditions of the Certificate of Compliance issued for the package.

Certificate of Compliance (CoC) No. 5957, Revision 24, dated March 26,1996, issued for the BMI-l Shipping Cask, requires in Condition 5(c) the minimum Transport Index to be shown on the label for nuclear criticality control (when shipping intact irradiated MTR-type fuel assemblies containing not more than 240 grams of uranium-235 (U-235) per assembly) shall be 0.4.

Contrary to the above, the shipping papers and/or !abel for various radioactive material shipments were not completed as required in that:

(1)

On the shipping papers filled out for shipments made using Federal Express as the carrier, at least two sets of shipping papers did not list the proper shipping name of the material being shipped.

(2)

The correct wording for the shippers' certification was not listed on various shipments of radioactive material designated as " Radioactive Material, N.O.S., UN2982," when the

• l i

2 lic'ensee's own " shipping form" was used.

(3) The correct wording for the certification of excepted packages was not listed on a notice enclosed in or on the package for shipments of radioactive material designated as

" Radioactive Material, Excepted Package - Limited Quantity ofMaterial".

(4) For Shipment Number R-66098-1, a shipment of four MTR-type control rod fuel elements classified as a Highway Route Controlled Shipment of RQ, Radioactive Material Fissile, 1 N.O.S., UN2918 and using the BMI-l Shipping Cask, the Transport Index of 0.4 required by the CoC when shipping MTR-type fuel was not listed on the label affixed to the cask )

1

, nor indicated on the shipping papers for the shipments.

l l

This is a Severity Level IV violation.

l Note by UVAR Director: NRC uses a 5-scale severity level range for violations, in which those at Severity Level I are of the greatest seriousness. Violations at Level V, the lowest level, are often not cited and never require a written response l

I i

l

3

=

l 3

l .

l Reply to a Notice of Violation i

1. Reason For Violation The violation is admitted. The reasons for the instances observed and cited are as follows:

l l Finding b.(1). While the individuals responsible for processing radioactive material shipments j were (and are) aware of proper shipping names, on one occasion when an Federal Express l Dangerous Goods Airbill was being prepared in advance of shipment the word " radioactive" was omitted as the form was being typed. This airbill was used as a guide for ensuing Fed Ex airbills, thus the typographical error was propagated in at least two shipments in which Fed Ex was used as the carrier. Unfortunately, the omission was not caught during the reviews of the shipping papers.

l Finding b.(2). The Health Physicist did not use the verbatim wording specified in 49CFR172.204, l in the belief that the terms in 172.204(a)(1), (a)(2) or 172.204(c) could be combined into a single l statement. While the intent of the regulation was preserved in the wording actually used, the wording did not meet legal requirements. It is now understood that the wording from the

! subsections of this regulation must not be combined into a single compound sit.tement and that only the verbatim statements specified are acceptable.

Finding b (3). In 1996, the shipper's certification form used by U.Va. was revised to reflect the DOT wording change from " radioactive material, limited quantity, n.o.s., UN2910" to the current

" radioactive material, exceptedpackage-limitedquantiry ofmaterial, UN2910." For years the l updated form was used, until copies of the old form were inadvertently brought back into sevice.

This change in wording was not caught during reviews conducted by the Health Physicist.

)

Finding b.(4). The violation occurred due to an unintentional error in the interpretation of the regulations and the CoC for the spent fuel shipping cask. As specified in the regulations, the  ;

maximum radiation level in units of millirem per hour at one meter was used in setting the T.I. at 0.2. However, the CoC requires that the T.I. be the maximum radiation level at one meter OR the transport index specified in the shipping cask's CoC (0.4), whichever nu aber is greater. We should have used the CoC's T.I. value of 0.4, instead of the 0.2 value called for by the regulations.

I

2. & 3. Corrective Steps, Results Achieved and Avoidance of Future Violations The following corrective steps are being taken and repetitions of this violation have been and will l be avoided, as follows:

Finding b.(1). The correct name for content material being shipped is now typed onto all shipping forms. Furthermore, the completed forms are being reviewed more closely by the Health

. ._ __ . _ . _ . _ . _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ -_..___._.__.____m.

4 Physicist t'o avoid repetition of this type of mistake.

Finding b.(2). The shipping form has been revised to show the exact wording specified in

< 172.402(a)(2). Use of the corrected form ensures that future violations of this nature cannot occur.

Finding b.(3). The word processor files used to generate these shipping forms have been checked to verify that they do in fact contain the up-to-date and verbatim wording required by 49CFR173.422(a). All old and incorrect forms and word processing files have been eliminated.

Shipping forms are being reviewed more closely to ensure that this error will not be repeated.

Finding b.(4). The shipping procedure used for spent fuel shipments will be revised to incorporate an instruction that the larger of the two transport indexes (the first derived from regulations and the second being the CoC's T.I. of 0.4) be used on the cask labels and in the shipping papers.

4. Date of Full Compliance i

Finding b.(1).. Full compliance has been achieved.

Finding b.(2). Full compliance has been achieved.

Finding b.(3). Full compliance has been achieved.

Finding b.(4). The spent fuel shipping procedures will be revised, reviewed and approved prior to the next fuel shipment.

't 4

. _. _ - -