IR 05000013/1978003
| ML20149A864 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Lynchburg Research Center |
| Issue date: | 10/30/1978 |
| From: | Sutherland J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | Engelder T BABCOCK & WILCOX CO. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20149A866 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7812080215 | |
| Download: ML20149A864 (2) | |
Text
.
.
yg UNITED STATES
-/3
[pm RfCoq'o, NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION (
,
R EGloN 11 b
3,,,
g 230 PE ACHTREE STREET, N. W. SUITE 1217
g e-'
,g
,
,
.
[
ATLANTA, GEORGI A 30303
%
.%.sJ
- ..*
OCT 3 01978 In Reply Refer To:
RII: JHD 50-99/78-3 50-13/78-3 Babcock and Wilcox Company ATTN:
Dr. Theodore C. Engelder, Director Lynchburg Research Center Research and Development Division P.O. Box 1260 Lynchburg, Virginia 24505 Gentlemen:
This refers to the inspection conducted by J. H. Davis of this office on September 18-22, 1978, of activities authorized by NRC License No. R-47 and CX-10 for the Lynchburg Pool Reactor and Critical Assembly facilities, and to the discussion of our findings held with Dr. E. D. Lynch at the conclusion of the inspection.
'
Areas examined during the inspection and our findings are discussed in the enclosed inspection report. Within these areas, the inspection consisted of selective examinations of procedures and representative records, interviews with personnel, and observations by the inspector.
Within the scope of this inspection, no items of noncompliance were disclosed.
We have examined actions you have taken with regard to previously identified enforcement matters and unresolved items. The status of these items is discussed in the enclosed report.
In accordance with Section 2.790 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice",
Part 2, Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, a copy of this letter and the enclosed inspection report will be placed in the NRC's Public Document Room.
If this report contains any information that you (or your contractor) believe to be proprietary, it is necessary that you make a written application within 20 days to this office to withhold such information from public disclosure. Any such application must include a full statement of the reasons on the basis of which it is claimed that the information is proprietary, and should be prepared so that proprietary information identified in the application is contained in a separete part of the document.
If we do not hear from you in this regard within the specified period, the' report will be placed in the Public Document Room.
78120802/5-l
DCT o0 a78,
>
.
..
-2-Should you have any questions concerning this letter, we will be glad to discuss them with you.
Sincerely, fet6
<
/ Jack T. Sutherland, Chief Fuel Facility and Materials Safety Branch Enclosure:
Inspection Report No.
50-99/78-3 and 50-13/78-3
- U00 UNITED STATES
J,,
1 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[
[
REGloN 11 o
101 M ARIETT A STR E ET, N.W.
!
E
ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303 o,,..w...j Report Nos.:
50-99/78-3 and 50-13/78-3 Docket Nos.:
50-99 and 50-13 Licensee: Babcock and Wilcox Company Lynchburg Research Center Research and Development Division P. O. Box 1260 Lynchburg, Virginia 24505 Facility Name: Lynchburg Pool Reactor, Criticals Inspection at: Lynchburg Research Center, Lynchburg, Virginia Inspection conducted: September 18-22, 1978 Inspector:
J. H. Day
/0 <2 7 78 Approved by:
- w
~
/ Date'
p A.F.Gpon,Chivf Radiation Support Section Fuel Facility and Materials Safety Branch Inspecticr. Summary Inspection on September 18-22, 1978 (Report Nos. 50-99/78-3 and 50- 13 / 7 8-3)
Areas Inspected: Routine, unannounced inspection covering radiation protection procedures, posting and labeling, radiation and contamination control, radiation instrumentation, surveys, personnel monitoring, training, radioactive effluent control and radioactive waste control. The inspection involved 16 inspector-hours on site by one NRC inspector.
Results: Of the nine areas inspected, no apparent items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
?81309
n.a c ~. ~. n n : a u. w : =.
,
.
4
.RII.Rpt. Nos. 50-99/78-3 I-1 and-50-13/78-3
DETAILS.I Prepared by:,
d
'
/
.27 7/'
J. g. Davis,. Radiation Specialist Dat6 Raffation SupportiSection Fuel Facility and Materials Safety Branch Dates of Inspectio
.
otemb r 18-22, 1978
,
Reviewed y:.
,
- M M
['# M 7[
p A. T.' Gf'on, Chief Date
!
RadiatiVn. Support Section-Fuel Facility and Materials Safety Branch
1.
Persons Contacted
- E. D.' Lynch, Laboratory Manager
- C.
E. Bell, Facilities Manager M. N. Baldwin,, Supervisor, Reactor Experiments
- C. A. Burnham, LPR Chief Operator
- A. F. Olsen, Licensing Administrator
- J. W.. Cure, III, Hcalth Physics Supervisor
'S. W. Croslin,. Health Physicist
,
Five technicians'and operators
,
- Denotes those present at exit interview.
2.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings
.1 (Closed) Unresolved Item (50-99/75-1/2) Develop and approve procedures for. calibration of portable survey instruments.
The inspector examined the approved procedure addressing instrument calibration, found the procedures adequate and had no further questions.
!!
(Closed)' Noncompliance (50-99/77-1/A) Failure to calibrate instru-
ments. Examination of calibration records for the area monitors and the pool top air. monitor for the period June 1977 to September 1978 revealed that the corrective actions stated in licensee's letter dated July 7, 1977, were taken and calibrations had been performed-during this period as required by technical specifications.
(Closed) Noncompliance (50-99/77.-1/B) Failure.to wear dosimeters.
Observations..made'by the inspector during the inspection and
.l discussions with 1icensee reptesentatives. revealed that corrective actions'specified in licensee's letter dated July 7, 1977, were taken and personnel in the'LPR facility were wearing pocket dosimeters as required by technical specifications.
i
,
<
,
,
..
... _
'
-
.
,
RII Rpt. Nos. 50-99/78-3 I-2 and 50-13/78-3 (Closed) Noncompliance (50-99/77-1/C) Failure to follow licensee procedures in the issuance of film badges. Discussion with licensee representatives and observations made by the inspector confirmed that corrective actions stated in licensee's letter dated July 7, 1977, had been taken.
The inspector was issued the same film badge each day of the visit as required by licensee's procedures.
3.
Unresolved Items No unresolved items were identified during this inspection.
4.
Radiation Protection Procedures The inspector reviewed procedures pertaining to radiation protection and radioactive effluents and determined that procedures were in effect and controlled as required by Technical Specification 6.4.
5.
Posting, Labeling and Access Control During a. tour of the LPR and CX-10 facilities on September 21, 1978, the inspector verified.by observation that areas were posted, containers of radioactive material were labeled and access was controlled as required by 10 CFR 20.203.
Discussions with licensee representatives regarding restricted access to radiation areas during operation of the LPR at various authorized power levels revealed that at certain power levels temporary barriers were established along with direct surveillance by licensee personnel. The inspector observed one instance of direct surveillance of a restricted area on September 21, 1978.
Discussion with licensee personnel involved indicated a clear understanding of the responsibility to control access for the purpose of protection from radiation as defined by 10 CFR 20.3(14).
The inspector had no further questions regarding posting and access control.
6.
Contamination Control Examination of licensee procedures and discussion with licensee representatives revealed that a program was in effect to assure that contamination detected within the restricted area would be controlled, cleaned up and prevented from spreading to unrestricted areas. All areas in the vicinity'of the LPR and the critical assembly were considered by the licensee to be clean areas with regards to con-tamination control.
Surveys for transferable contamination were made at the request' and in the presence of the inspector during the plant
,
'
. tour on September 21, 1978. Results of the survey were below the licensee's action level for uncontrolled areas.
_ - _ - _ -
._
_
_ _ _ _ _ _
.
RII Rpt. Nos. 50-99/78-3 I-3 and 50-13/78-3 The inspector had no further questions with regards to contamination control.
7.
Radiation Instrumentation The inspector reviewed with a licensee representative the set points for the pool-top area radiation monitor, the console and beam port radiation monitor, the heat exchanger radiation monitor and the pool-top air monitor. The alarm set points specified in the technical specifications were verified by witness by the inspector of a test performed by a licensee representative on September 21, 1978.
Calibra-tion records for July-December 1977 and January-September 1978 were examined by the inspector and the records revealed that calibration of the area monitors, pool-top air monitor, and portable survey instruments had been performed at the required frequencies.
A survey instrument was available for surveying personnel who may have become contaminated and for surveying equipment prior to being cleared for removal from the area.
The inspector had no further questions regarding radiation instru-mentation.
8.
Surveys Examination of survey records for July - December 1977 and
,
January - September 1978 revealed that surveys had been performed as
'
'
required by 10 CFR 20 and technical specifications.
Discussion with l
licensee representatives and examination of the survey records
revealed that when surveys revealed significant contamination or radiation levels above regulatory limits the licensee had taken appropriate measures to prevent or limit personnel exposure as required by 10 CFR 20.101, 20.105, and 20.203. Direct radiation surveys made at the request of, and in the presence of, the inspector during LPR operation on September 21, 1978, revealed that radiation levels at the restricted area boundaries were below regulatory limits.
However, survey records revealed, and discussion with licensee repre-sentatives confirmed, that when the LPR operated above approximately 50 percent of the 1 MW power level authorized by the license, a temporary barrier was required and direct surveillance utilized by the licensee to restrict access to radiation areas.
This situation was created by the relocation of a fence necessitated by the construction of a new building and a new road to the parking lot.
The inspector discussed with licensee representatives long-range plans to increase shielding to preclude the necessity'of the temporary barriers during operation at higher power levels.
l
l
_ _ _ _ -_---_-.__
,
.
.
.
.
.
_
_
_
_
> + :
. ~
z.=
,_.-.-.a..
G
'
i
'RII.Rpt. Nos. 50-99/78-3 I-4-and 50-13/78-3
._
The. inspector had no 'further questions regarding surveys.
9.
Personnel Monitoring-I
.a.
Exposure Records.
,
Examination of personnel exposure records furnished by the film-badge vendor for the,last quarter:1977 and the first and second quarter 1978 revealed that personnel exposures were well below regulatory' limits. Bioassay records for selected individuals for this period revealed body / organ levels a'few percent of maximum permissible body burden.
b.
Personnel Dosimeters Examination of pocket dosimeter calibration records for June 1978 revealed that approximately six hundred dosimeters had been exposed to known radiation fields with-fewer than 2 percent.being discarded as a result of not meeting the~+15 per-cent acceptance criterion. Observation by the inspector revealed that dosimeters were available to personnel working in the vicinity'of the LPR and critical assembly'and personnel observed by the inspector were wearing the dosimeters as required by technical specifications.
The. inspector had no further questions regarding personne1'*
monitoring.
,
10.
Training Examination of training records dated April 17, 1978, revealed that personnel working in the vicinity of the LPR and the critical assembly had been instructed with regards to radiation protection as required by 10 CFR 19.12.
"
11.
Radioactive Effluent Control a.-
Radioactive Liquid-Effluent Discussion with licensee representatives and observations made by the_ inspector: revealed that. radioactive liquid waste was collected inL af storage-tank, sampled to determine concentration.of radio-activity,-and, if. sample results indicated concentrations below maximum. permissible concentrations, the wastes were discharged to another Babcock and Wilcox facility's water treatment ' system prior to' discharge to unrestricted areas. Examination of radio-
- active liquid; release records for June 1977 to September 1978
%
,
..
.
RII Rpt. Nos. 50-99/78-3 I-5 and 30-13/78-3 revealed that records were being kept as required by 10 CFR 20.401 and concentrations were below limits specified in 10 CFR 20.106.
b.
Airborne Effluents Discussion with licensee representatives and observations made by the inspector revealed that air monitoring was accomplished by means of the pool-top air-monitor and that the only discharge path available to airborne effluents was via room air circulation i
paths.
Pool-top air monitor readings indicated airborne levels well below maximum Permissible concentrations f or unrestricted j
areas.
The inspector had no further questions regarding airborne effluents.
c.
Environmental Sampling Program The inspector discussed with licensee representatives the environmental sampling program for the facility. Environmental sampling records for March 25, 1978, June 30, 1978, and August 31, 1978, revealed that samples had been taken of the Jrnes River, rainwater, vegetation and mud.
Sample records confirmed that apparently there was no significant accumulation of radioactivity in the environment resulting from the operation of the facility.
12.
Radioactive Waste Control Observation by the inspector and discussion with licensee representa-tives revealed that radioactive waste is accumulated in containers labeled in accordance with 10 CFR 20.203.
Radioactive waste shipment records for June 1977 - September 1978 revealed that shipments had been made to a licensed disposal agency in accordance with 10 CFR 71, and disposal records had been kept as required by 10 CFR 20.403.
The inspector had no further questions regarding radioactive waste control.
13.
Bulletins and Circulars Circular 78-03 " Packaging Greater Than Type A Quantities of Low a.
Specific Activity Radioactive Material For Transport".
Licensee representativies stated that it was their practice not to ship greater than Type A quantities as LSA. Examination of Radioactive Waste Shipment records confirmed this.
i
.. ~
_
,
j _
..a x ;
c 7.,..;p 1.~
.
.,
.~
.
- t.
-RII Rpt. No's.-. 50-99/78-3.
'I-6 and 50-13/78-3
,
b.
Bu11etin.78-07 " Protect' ion afforded by Air-Line Respirators And-
. Supplied Air Hoods". Licensee, representatives stated that no
~
supplied-air hoods.were used at-the facility and no air-line respirators were_ operated in the demand mode.. A formal negative
,
response'was? submitted to NRC by.the licensee.
c.
Bu11etin.78-08 "Radiat' ion Levels.From Fuel Element' Transfer-Tubes". Licensee representatives stated that no such tubes existed at'the facility and' stated that-a formal negative response was submitted.to NRC.
14. Exit Interview i
The inspector met with licensee representatives (denoted in parag'raph 1)
on September ~22, 1978, and summarized the scope and findings of'the
,
inspection, t
....
I.
I
,
I
.J j
'
~j 6. ( G.
'
id.-
'T
' '
> A[ /
e
.
-
...-
.
.
%
N: '
"
r.
,
o s
,,
'
- n
.