ML20134A384

Special Safety Insp Rept 99990003/85-110 on 850925-1010. Violations Noted:Failure to Perform Leak Tests at Required Intervals & Radioactive Matl Removed by Unauthorized Persons

ML20134A384
Person / Time
Issue date:	10/29/1985
From:	Axelson W, Simmons T, Sreniawski D NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III)
To:
Shared Package
ML20134A374	List: ML20134A371 ML20134A384
References
99990003-85-110, NUDOCS 8511040383
Download: ML20134A384 (5)

See also: IR 05000925/2010010

Text

. .~ . .- .. . . -

. ,

.. - _ -

'

%

I

'

,

a.

1

.

i

'

U. S. NUCLEAR' REGULATORY COMMISSION

REGION:III

4

Report No.'999-90003/85-110(DRSS).

~

Docket No. 999-90003

.

hicensee: . Delmont'e Corporation

One Market Plaza

San Francisco, CA 94119

. Inspection Conducted:

_

September 25 through October 10, 1985

~0nsite Inspection Conducted On: October 3, 1985

Located At: DelMonte Corporation

506 W. North Street

Plymouth, Indiana

Inspector: T. L. Simmons _m . (0/G1/6f

Radiation Specialist '

Dat / ,

T >

'

Reviewed By: ' D. J. Sreniawski, Chief . IO[Gg/g $  ;

Nuclear Materials Safety '

Datd

Section 2 -

E- AphrovedBy: W. L. elson, h IC 't f

Nuclear Materials Safety Date  ;

<

and Safeguards Branch

,

'

Inspection ~ Summary

Inspection on September 25 through October 10, 1985

'

(Report No. 999-90003/85-110(DRSS)) '

Areas Inspected: Special safety inspection of the circumstances involving a

gauge containing radioactive material retrieved from a scrap yard. This

inspection included a review of records.. letters and documents, and interviews

' with individuals. involved. The inspection involved a total of 21 hours2.430556e-4 days <br />0.00583 hours <br />3.472222e-5 weeks <br />7.9905e-6 months <br /> by one.

'

NRCh i nspector.

'

.. .

'

Results: ?Three violations were identified: (1) 10 CFR 31.5(c)(2) --failure ~

Lto perform xleak tests at required intervals (Section 3); (2) 10 CFR 31.5(c)(3) -

removal from installation by una'uthorized individuals (Section 3); (3) 10 CFR t

, 31.5(c)(8) - unauthorized disposal of byproduct material (Section 3).

,

l .8511040383 851029 :

,

IE~ GA999 EMVDMONT

99990003 PDR

, -, .i , _ _ . . , ,

_1. _ . ., . _

-

,_ ;-, --- , , , _ _ . , _ . , _ _ _ ~ . . - , _ . . . . _ . - _

.

!

DETAILS

1. Persons Contacted

I

F. Calhoun, President, Industrial Dynamics Co. Ltd., Torrence, California

R. Ohms, Foreman, Milupa Corporation, East Troy, Wisconsin

R. Filter, Plant Manager, Milupa Corporation, East Troy, Wisconsin

J. Newton, QA Manager,.DelMonte Corporation, Dayton, New Jersey

• K. Peacock, Plant Manager, DelMonte Corporation, Plymouth, Indiana

• D. Stevenson, Engineer, DelMonte Corporation, Plymouth, Indiana

P. Martin, DelMonte Corporation, Plymouth, Indiana

M. Morris, Manager, Franklin Scrap Yard, Plymouth, Indiana

J. VanKirk, Driver, Franklin Scrap Yard, Plymouth, Indiana

B. Mervis, Manager, Mervis'and Sons Scrap Yard, Kokomo, Indiana

-C. Holderead, Director, Civil Defense Office,-Marshall County, Indiana

R. Hudson, Civil Defense Office, Indianapolis, Indiana

H. Stocks, Indiana State Board of Health

W. Spain, Director, Corporate Quality. Assurance and

Regulatory Affairs

• Present at exit interview (via telephone).

2. Purpose of Inspection

This was a special inspection to review the circumstances surrounding an

americium-241 gauge found in a scrap yard. This incident was reported

to NRC Region III by the Indiana State Board of Heal . on September 25,

1985.

3. Inspection Findings

A 100 millicurie americium-241 gauge was discovered at a Kokomo, Indiana

scrap yard on or about September 19, 1985. The gauge was part of a load

of scrap sent ther'e for cutting by the Franklin Scrap Yard of Plymouth,'

-Indiana.' The gauge was returned to Plymouth by a Franklin Scrap Yard

driver on September 20, 1985 because it was labeled " radioactive material."

Yard personnel notified the local Civil Defense Office the following Monday

-(September 23). Civil Defense personnel,-upon confirming that the device

was radioactive, transported it to the Indiana State Board of Health (see

Attachment A - Civil Defense report). Indiana State Board of Health (ISBH)

personnel performed a leak test, a radiation survey, and photographed the

device (see Attachment 8 - ISBH memo and photos). No leakage was detected.

~

They also-arranged to ship the device to the manufacturer. Upon receipt,

the manufacturer verified the integrity of the source.(see Attachment C -

leak test results).

It was determined by device and source serial numbers that the gauge

was purchased from Industrial Dynamic Company, Ltd. of Torrence, Cali-

fornia by RJR r' cods of Winston-Salem, North Carolina in 1979. The device

was installed by the manufacturer in a plant located in East Troy,

Wisconsin (see Attachments D and E).

2

l

l

The gauge was removed from installation sometime after March 8, 1980 by

RJR Foods /DelMonte personnel and placed into storage at its Dayton, New I

Jersey plant (see Attachment F). Removal ~of a generally licensed nuclear I

gauge from installation by a general licensee is in violation of 10 CFR

31.5(c)(3), which states that the removal from installation of a generally

licensed device containing radioactive material shall be performed by a

person holding a specific license or an Agreement State licensee to per-

form such activities.

At some time after October 1980 the gauge, along with other surplus

equipment, was transferred to the DelMonte plant in Plymouth, Indiana

where it was placed in storage. In August 1985, DelMonte personnel

discarded the gauge as scrap which was sold to Franklin Scrap Yard.

Disposal of licensed material in this manner is a violation of 10 CFR

31.5(c)(8), which states that a general licensee shall dispose of the

device containing byproduct material only by transfer to persons holding

a specific license or an Agreement State to receive the. device.

In addition, the last leak test of the gauge was performed in March 1980

by the manufacturer. No leak tests were performed while the gauge was

in storage. Failure to perform six month leak tests is a violation of

10 CFR 31.5(c)(2), which states any person who acquires, receives,

possesses or uses by product material in a device pursuant to a general

license shall assure that the device is tested for leakage of radioactive

material at no longer than six month intervals.

Three violations were identified.

4. Exposure Estimate

The only person determined to be in proximity of the gauge was the driver

who transported the device from Kokomo, Indiana to Plymouth, Indiana. The

driver stated that the trip took about 1-1/2 hours and that the gauge wac

on the front seat, four feet away from him.- It is not known whether the

device was in the on or off position at this time. However, the device

was in the on position when confiscated by the ISBH. Accordingly,

assuming that the device was in the on position, the following exposure

estimates were made based on the Indiana State Board of Health's radiation

survey:

The source is 0.8 inches from the surface of the device.

The radiation level was 200 mR/hr at the surface of the device.

The exposure rate (E) calculated for a distance of 4 ft. would be:

E = 200 mR/hr (0.8")2 = 0.06 mR/hr *

( 48")2

3

, _

, . . . _ _ . _ . _ . . - . _ _- ._

~

,

s

s

- Theidose (D) to the-truck driver would be:

D =-0.06 mR/hr 9 4.ft. x 1-1/2 hrs.

D = 0.08 mR @.4 ft.

, , Worst Case: device 2 feet from driver

,

D = 0.33 mR @ 2 ft.

=In both cases, driver at 4 ft. or at 2 ft. , would have resulted in a

dose to the' driver of less than 0.5 mR which represents no significant

' health hazard.

'

5. Exit Interview

,

0n~0ctober-3, 1985, the inspector met with those individuals denoted

in Section 1.of this report. The discussion included'a review of;the

incident,.the licensee's corrective measures taken, and potential NRC

enforcement action. This' matter was also discussed with Mr. W.- Spain,

Director,-Corporate Quality Assurance and Regulatory Affairs on

, October.4, 1985. Mr. Spain submitted, in a letter dated October 7, 1985 *

E .-(see-Appendix 3),.further corrective measures to be taken by DelMonte .

.

- 6. Enforcement Conference.

~

'A'n Enforcement Conference was held by telephone on October 21, 1985 to

. discuss the findings ofian NRC1special safety inspection conducted on

September 25 through October 10, 1985.~ The conference was conducted

-between Messrs. Spain and Fish of DelMonte's staff, and Mr. J. A. Hind

and members of the NRC Region III staff. The purpose of the conference

was to.(1) discuss the apparent violations, their significance and causes,

-and the licensee's corrective actions; (2) determine whether there were

any aggravating or mitigating. circumstances, and (3) obtain other informa-

tion which could help determine the appropriate enforcement action.

.Mr. J. A. Hind, Director, Division of Radiological Safety and Safeguards,

p opened the conference by describing the purpose and scope of the meeting

as well as the NRC. enforcement policy and concerns raised as a result of

-

the September 25 through October. 10, 1985. inspection. .

The-apparent violations were reviewed with the licensee. The licensee

'

representatives were not in. disagreement with the factslas' stated. The

licensee representatives were informed that the unauthorized removal and

'

-disposal of.the gauge could represent a Severity Level III violation

pursuant.to NRC policy.

.

s

e

J

4

>'

,

n --

e. m. . . .- , c . --,_.-..m_ . - - - - - - . ~ ,,.-m . -- - - - , - . , _ - , - .-.-.-..r.~

- _. -- . _

.

- Attachments:

A. Civil Defe~nse Report

- B. Indiana. State Board of

Health Memo and

.

. Photographs of Device

-

C. -Industrial Dynamics Co.

-Ltd. Leak Test Results

-

D. Industrial Dynamics Co.

'

Ltd. Shipping Record

. E. Industrial Dynamics Co.

Ltd. Service Record

F. _ Correspondence /Milupa

and RJR Foods

Appendix:

1. Chronology of Events

-Concerning Filter Gauge

. 2. Sample Package Sent to

. General Licensees by

Industrial Dynamics

- 3. De1 Monte Corporation

Letter dated 10/03/85

1

_

'

L

5

. . - , . - . - - . - - - - - . . - . . . .. _

_ - . - . . . . - . . . - - . - . . . - . . - . _ . . . _ - ._