IR 05000166/2008201

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
IR 05000166-08-201, on 08/25/2008 - 08/28/2008, University of MD
ML082530312
Person / Time
Site: University of Maryland
Issue date: 09/18/2008
From: Johnny Eads
Research and Test Reactors Branch B
To: Al-Sheikhly M
Univ of Maryland
Voth M, NRR/ADRA/DPR/PRT, 415-1210
References
IR-08-201
Download: ML082530312 (15)
v • d • e


Text

ber 18, 2008

SUBJECT:

NRC INSPECTION REPORT NO. 50-166/2008-201

Dear Dr. Al-Sheikhly:

This letter refers to the inspection conducted on August 25 to 28, 2008, at your Maryland University Training Reactor Facility. The inspection included a review of activities authorized for your facility. The enclosed report presents the results of that inspection.

Areas examined during the inspection are identified in the report. Within these areas, the inspection consisted of selective examinations of procedures and representative records, interviews with personnel, and observations of activities in progress. Based on the results of this inspection, no safety concern or noncompliance of Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)

requirements was identified. No response to this letter is required.

In accordance with 10 CFR 2.390 of the NRC's "Rules of Practice," a copy of this letter and its enclosure will be available electronically for public inspection in the NRC Public Document Room or from the Publicly Available Records (PARS) component of NRCs Agencywide Document Access Management System (ADAMS). ADAMS is accessible from the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html (the Public Electronic Reading Room).

Should you have any questions concerning this inspection, please contact Marcus Voth at 301-415-1210.

Sincerely,

/RA/

Johnny H. Eads, Jr., Branch Chief Research and Test Reactors Branch B Division of Policy and Rulemaking Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No. 50-166 License No. R-70 Enclosure: As stated cc w/ enclosure: See next page

University of Maryland Docket No. 50-166 cc:

Director, Dept. of Natural Resources Power Plant Siting Program Energy & Coastal Zone Administration Tawes State Office Building Annapolis, MD 21401 Mr. Roland Fletcher, Director Center for Radiological Health Maryland Department of Environment 201 West Preston Street 7th Floor Mail Room Baltimore, MD 21201 Mr. Vincent G. Adams Facility Coordinator Chemical and Nuclear Engineering Building 090 University of Maryland College Park, MD 20742 Tom OBrien, Radiation Safety Officer ber 18, 2008

SUBJECT:

NRC INSPECTION REPORT NO. 50-166/2008-201

Dear Dr. Al-Sheikhly:

This letter refers to the inspection conducted on August 25 to 28, 2008, at your Maryland University Training Reactor Facility. The inspection included a review of activities authorized for your facility. The enclosed report presents the results of that inspection.

Areas examined during the inspection are identified in the report. Within these areas, the inspection consisted of selective examinations of procedures and representative records, interviews with personnel, and observations of activities in progress. Based on the results of this inspection, no safety concern or noncompliance of Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)

requirements was identified. No response to this letter is required.

In accordance with 10 CFR 2.390 of the NRC's "Rules of Practice," a copy of this letter and its enclosure will be available electronically for public inspection in the NRC Public Document Room or from the Publicly Available Records (PARS) component of NRCs Agencywide Document Access Management System (ADAMS). ADAMS is accessible from the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html (the Public Electronic Reading Room).

Should you have any questions concerning this inspection, please contact Marcus Voth at 301-415-1210.

Sincerely,

/RA/

Johnny H. Eads, Jr., Branch Chief Research and Test Reactors Branch B Division of Policy and Rulemaking Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No. 50-166 License No. R-70 Enclosure: As stated cc w/ enclosure: See next page DISTRIBUTION:

PUBLIC PRTB/rf RidsNrrDprPrta RidsOgcMailCenter MVoth AAdams RidsNrrDprPrtb BDavis (Ltr only O13-E19)

ADAMS ACCESSION NO.: ML082530312 TEMPLATE #: NRR-106 OFFICE PRT:RI PRT:LA PRT:BC NAME MVoth mhv EBarnhill eeb JEads jhe DATE 8/29/08 09/18/2008 9/18/08 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY

U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION Docket No: 50-166 License No: R-70 Report No: 50-166/2008-201 Licensee: University of Maryland Facility: Maryland University Training Reactor Location: College Park, Maryland Dates: August 25 to 28, 2008 Inspectors: Marcus H. Voth, Lead G. Michael Morlang Approved by: Johnny H. Eads, Branch Chief Research and Test Reactors Branch B Division of Policy and Rulemaking Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY University of Maryland Maryland University Training Reactor Facility NRC Inspection Report No. 50-166/2008-201 The primary focus of this routine, announced inspection was the onsite review of selected aspects of the licensees Class II research reactor facility safety programs including organization and staffing; operations logs and records; requalification training; surveillance and limiting conditions for operation; emergency planning; maintenance logs and records; fuel handling logs and records; and followup on previously identified items since the last NRC inspection of these areas. The licensees programs were acceptably directed toward the protection of public health and safety, and were in compliance with NRC requirements.

Organization and Staffing

  • The licensee's organization and staffing was in compliance with the requirements specified in the Technical Specifications.

Operations Logs and Records

  • Within the scope of this review, the licensees operations record keeping program conformed to Technical Specification requirements.

Requalification Training

  • Operator requalification was conducted as required by the Requalification Program.

Surveillance and Limiting Conditions for Operation

  • Operations were found to be in compliance with the limiting conditions for operation and surveillances requirements as stated in the Technical Specifications.

Emergency Planning

Maintenance Logs and Records

  • The licensee maintained records documenting principal preventative maintenance activities and maintained a records system for corrective maintenance but made very few entries.

Fuel Handling Logs and Records

  • Fuel handling was performed safely but proper documentation of fuel movement and the material inventory were not being maintained.

-2-Follow-up of Previously Identified Issues

  • The unresolved item regarding documentation of a surveillance requirement for control rod inspection combined with the more generic issue of the inspector follow-up item regarding the need for improved record and documentation processes were classified as violations of minor significance and thereby closed.
  • An inspector follow-up item was closed following the signing of a memorandum of understanding with the Prince Georges County Fire Department.

REPORT DETAILS Summary of Facility Status The 250 kilowatt Maryland University Training Reactor (MUTR) continued to be operated in support of graduate and undergraduate research and laboratory instruction. The inspectors witnessed a reactor checkout, startup, and shutdown performed by a reactor operator trainee under the supervision of the Facility Coordinator.

1. Organization and Staffing a. Inspection Scope (Inspection Procedure (IP) 69001-02.01)

The inspectors reviewed the following regarding the licensee's organization and staffing to ensure that the requirements of Section 6.1, Organization, of the Technical Specifications (TS), Amendment No. 9 to License No. R-70, dated November 24, 1986, were being met:

  • MUTR organizational structure and staffing
  • Reactor Console Logbook from March 15, 2004 to present
  • MUTR Operating Procedures Manual b. Observations and Findings Through discussions with licensee representatives, the inspectors compared the management structure at the facility to the constraints listed in the TS. The reactor staffing had not changed from the previous inspection except that student reactor operators had left and new students had been trained and were about to be examined.

There were two NRC-licensed Senior Reactor Operators (SRO), the Facility Director and the Facility Coordinator, and an NRC-licensed student Reactor Operator (RO) who was preparing for an SRO examination in October. Three students were preparing to take RO examinations in October. The inspectors noted that reactor logbook entries for each reactor startup reviewed indicated staffing that met or exceeded the minimum requirements of TS Section 6.1.3, Facility Staff Requirements.

At the time of the previous inspection (June of 2007) the university was awaiting a consultants final report concerning staffing of the radiation protection office. Since that time a number of changes were implemented. A Certified Health Physicist was added to the organization as the campus Radiation Safety Officer (RSO), reporting directly to the Director of Environment Health and Safety. In addition, a health physics technician and a records clerk were added to the staff, commensurate with the workload and responsibilities related to activities authorized by the reactor license and radioisotope applications on campus performed under other licenses.

c. Conclusions The licensee's organization and staffing was in compliance with the requirements specified in the Technical Specifications.

-2-2. Operations Logs and Records a. Inspection Scope (IP 69001-02.02)

The inspectors reviewed selected parts of the following reactor operations records to verify that operations were being conducted in accordance with license and regulatory requirements:

  • MUTR Operating Procedure (OP)-100, Control and Maintenance Procedures, Rev. 12, March 27, 2000
  • OP-101, Reactor Startup Checkout, Rev. 12, March 27, 2000
  • OP-102, Reactor Shutdown Checkout, Rev. 12, March 27, 2000
  • OP-103, Reactor Startup, Rev. 12, March 27, 2000
  • OP-104, Reactor Operation, Rev. 12, March 27, 2000
  • Reactor Console Logbook from March 15, 2004 to present
  • File of Daily Startup Checklists (from OP-101) for the past year
  • File of Shutdown Checklists (from OP-102) for the past year b. Observations and Findings The MUTR procedures specified a records system that met license requirements.

Procedures called for most operational data to be recorded in the reactor logbooks, startup checklists, and shutdown checklists. Data recorded indicated that the reactor was operated within the envelope of safety parameters established in the reactor license and TS.

c. Conclusions Within the scope of this review, the licensees operations record keeping program conformed to Technical Specification requirements.

3. Requalification Training a. Inspection Scope (IP 69001-02.04)

The inspectors reviewed the following to verify that the requirements of 10 CFR 50.55, Operators Licenses, were being met:

  • Requalification/Training Program for the MUTR, March 21, 2000
  • Medical File for one SRO b. Observations and Findings The licensee maintained one program for training new reactor operators and meeting the requalification requirements of 10 CFR 50.55 for licensed ROs and SROs. The plan defined 25 areas of training. The inspectors reviewed records for the 2007-2008 requalification cycle for the topic of training/retraining presented, those in attendance, and the duration of each session. While the plan contained provisions to make up for missed sessions, the inspectors did not find any cases where there was not perfect attendance.

-3-The inspectors reviewed the medical file for one NRC-licensed SRO, which included periodic reports of physical examinations indicating that for acceptance criteria regarding the candidates physical condition the physician used Section 7, Medical Certification and Monitoring of Certified Personnel, of the American National Standards Institute and the American Nuclear Society Standard ANSI/ANS 15.4-1988, Selection and Training of Personnel for Research Reactors.

c. Conclusions Operator requalification was conducted as required by the Requalification Program.

4. Surveillance and Limiting Conditions for Operation a. Inspection Scope (IP 69001-02.05)

The inspectors reviewed the following to verify compliance with TS Section 3.0, Limiting Conditions for Operation, and to determine if the periodic surveillance tests on safety systems were performed as stipulated in TS Section 4.0, Surveillance Requirements:

  • Reactor Console Logbook from March 15, 2004 to present
  • OP-101, Reactor Startup Checkout, Rev. 12, March 27, 2000
  • OP-102, Reactor Shutdown Checkout, Rev. 12, March 27, 2000
  • OP-103, Reactor Startup, Rev. 12, March 27, 2000
  • OP-104, Reactor Operation, Rev. 12, March 27, 2000
  • Surveillance Procedure (SP)-201, Control Rod Poison Section Inspection, Rev. 12, March 27, 2000
  • SP-202, Thermal Power Calibration Procedure, Rev. 12, March 27, 2000
  • SP-204, Control Rod Calibration by the Positive Asymptotic Period Method, Rev. 12, March 27, 2000
  • File of Daily Startup Checklists (from OP-101) for the past year
  • File of Shutdown Checklists (from OP-102) for the past year b. Observations and Findings The inspectors witnessed a reactor startup, approach to critical, ascension to power, and shutdown, observing the completion and documentation of numerous TS surveillances and compliance with TS limiting conditions for operation. This was accomplished through adherence to written procedures which had been reviewed by the Reactor Safety Committee (RSC) in accordance with TS Section 6.3, Operating Procedures.

Additional records for the surveillances cited above were also reviewed. The inspectors pointed out to licensee management that while the results appeared complete and reasonable, signatures indicating management review were missing on numerous work sheets and data sheets for the surveillances performed for the years 2007 and 2008.

c. Conclusions Operations were found to be in compliance with the limiting conditions for operation and surveillances requirements as stated in the Technical Specifications.

-4-5. Emergency Planning a. Inspection Scope (IP 69001-02.10)

The inspectors reviewed the implementation of selected portions of the emergency preparedness program including:

  • Memorandum of Understanding [between the Prince Georges County Fire/Emergency Medical Services Department and the University of Maryland],

May 1, 2008

  • SP-211, Inventory and Replenishment of EP Supplies, Rev. 12, March 27, 2000
  • Emergency Procedure (EP)-401, Reactor Building Evacuation, Rev. 12, March 27, 2000
  • EP-402, Primary Coolant Leaks, Rev. 12, March 27, 2000
  • EP-403, Response to Reportable Occurrences, Rev. 12, March 27, 2000
  • EP-404, Release of Radioactivity, Rev. 12, March 27, 2000
  • EP-406, Responsibility of and Instructions to the MUTR Emergency Organization, Rev. 10, June 16, 1993
  • EP-407, Nuclear Reactor Emergency Contact List, Rev. 12.2, December 19, 2000
  • S. Petras, Constellation Nuclear Services, to M. Al-Sheikhly, MUTR Facility Director, Annual Emergency Drill External Audit Results, August 19, 2005
  • S. Petras, Constellation Nuclear Services, to M. Al-Sheikhly, MUTR Facility Director, Annual Emergency Drill External Audit Results, July 28, 2006
  • S. Petras, Constellation Nuclear Services, to M. Al-Sheikhly, MUTR Facility Director, Annual Emergency Drill External Audit Results, July 2, 2008
  • Facility file 4.2, Emergency Plan Drills b. Observations and Findings The licensees emergency management was the responsibility of the Office of Environmental Health and Safety (EHS). The reactor staff worked closely with EHS staff in matters such as emergency preparedness and exercises. The inspectors reviewed records of an exercise demonstrating this on May 13, 2007; the exercise simulated an attempted theft of radioactive materials by a person armed with explosives.

The licensee had signed a memorandum of understanding with the county fire department since the previous inspection. The inspectors met with the Assistant Fire Chief of the fire company at the station which bordered the campus. He cited emergency resources that were available, response times, and training of personnel, all of which met or exceeded those credited in the emergency plan. During the course of the inspection, facility workers renovating parts of the building housing the reactor (but not in the reactor area) inadvertently set off a fire alarm. The inspectors observed the response of the fire department and campus police resources in times similar to those reported during interviews.

-5-c. Conclusions The aspects of the emergency preparedness program inspected were found to be in accordance with the Emergency Plan.

6. Maintenance Logs and Records a. Inspection Scope (IP 69001-02.11)

The inspectors reviewed the following to verify compliance with TS Section 3.0, Limiting Conditions for Operation, and to determine if the periodic surveillance tests on safety systems were performed as stipulated in TS Section 4.0, Surveillance Requirements:

  • Reactor Console Logbook from March 15, 2004 to present
  • Maintenance Logbook (no number assigned)
  • Maintenance Procedure (MP)-301, Dismantling and Reassembling Fuel Bundles, Rev. 12, March 27, 2000
  • MP-303, Fuel Movement, Rev. 12, March 27, 2000
  • MP-304, Control Rod Drive and Control Rod Removal, Rev. 12 b. Observations and Findings The inspectors reviewed selected portions of the control room and maintenance logbooks governing the interval of time since the previous inspection. Preventative maintenance required by TS was performed as part of the surveillance program and was therefore inspected as reported in Section 5 of this inspection report. Corrective maintenance was performed as needed and a logbook was available for recording maintenance performed but very few entries were made in the logbook.

c. Conclusions The licensee maintained records documenting principal preventative maintenance activities and maintained a records system for corrective maintenance but made very few entries.

7. Fuel Handling Logs and Records a. Inspection Scope (IP 69001-02.12)

The inspectors reviewed the following to verify safe handling and proper accountability of reactor fuel during fuel movements:

  • Reactor Console Logbook from March 15, 2004 to present
  • Maintenance Logbook (no number assigned)
  • Room MP-301, Dismantling and Reassembling Fuel Bundle, Rev. 12, March 27, 2000
  • MP-303, Fuel Movement, Rev. 12, March 27, 2000
  • Fuel Status Board in the Control Room

-6-b. Observations and Find Historically, the licensee only moved fuel to conduct maintenance and surveillance, after which the fuel was returned to the original core configuration. A procedure indicating the specific fuel moves was reportedly prepared for each such evolution. Fuel moves were documented on the procedure which was then pasted into the maintenance logbook.

The inspectors noted that the record of the most recent fuel moves was not in the logbook; however, the licensee placed it there before the inspectors exited.

The inspectors also found that the licensee had not maintained current SNM status reports but that they, too, were completed before the inspectors exited.

c. Conclusions Fuel handling was performed safely but proper documentation of fuel movement and the material inventory were not being maintained.

8. Follow-up of Previously Identified Issues a. Inspection Scope (IP 92701)

The inspectors interviewed personnel and reviewed the following document to address issues identified in previous inspections:

  • Memorandum of Understanding [between the Prince Georges County Fire/Emergency Medical Services Department and the University of Maryland],

May 1, 2008 b. Observations and Findings Unresolved Item (URI) 50-166/2006-201-01 was raised in a 2006 inspection when the licensee could not provide documentation that a control rod had been inspected on a timely basis. The licensee thought that it was done but not documented clearly. This issue was considered to be a specific example of the minor violation addressed in the Inspector Follow-up Item (IFI) in the following paragraph.

IFI 50-166/2007-201-01 identified a number of specific examples of inadequate documentation, numerous ones which remained in the current inspection and are discussed throughout this report. This matter, along with the specific URI discussed in the previous paragraph, constitute violations of minor significance that should be corrected but are not subject to enforcement action in accordance with Section IV of the NRC Enforcement Policy. (URI 50-166/2006-201 and IFI 50-166/2007-01 were therefore closed.)

IFI 50-166/2006-201-02 tracked the fact that a memorandum of understanding was outdated and in the process of being signed by a new university official. The updated document cited above was signed in May of 2008, thereby terminating this IFI. (IFI 50-166/2006-201-02 was closed.)

-7-c. Conclusions The unresolved item regarding documentation of a surveillance requirement for control rod inspection combined with the more generic issue of the inspector follow-up item regarding the need for improved record and documentation processes were classified as violations of minor significance and thereby closed.

An inspector follow-up item was closed following the signing of a memorandum of understanding with the Prince Georges County Fire Department.

9. Exit Interview The inspection scope and results were summarized on August 28, 2008, with members of licensee management. The inspectors described the areas inspected and discussed in detail the inspection findings. The licensee stated that the message regarding the need for improved record-keeping would receive their immediate attention. No dissenting comments were received from the licensee.

PARTIAL LIST OF PERSONS CONTACTED Licensee V. Adams Facility Coordinator and Senior Reactor Operator M. Al-Sheikhly Director, Radiation Facilities and Nuclear Reactor T. OBrien Radiation Safety Officer, Department of Environmental Safety G. Pertmer Chairman of the Reactor Safety Committee and Associate Dean B. Zidek Health Physicist Other Personnel W. Corrigan Assistant Fire Chief, Prince Georges County Fire Station #12 INSPECTION PROCEDURES USED IP 69001 Class II Research and Test Reactors IP 92701 Follow-up ITEMS OPENED, CLOSED, AND DISCUSSED Opened None Closed 50-166/2006-201-01 URI Failure to conduct visual inspections of the control rods in accordance with TS requirements 50-166/2006-201-02 IFI Follow-up to verify that the licensee reviews the Memorandum of Understanding with the Prince Georges County Fire Department 50-166/2007-201-01 IFI Improved documentation of TS compliance regarding RSC records, ALARA audit, annual report submission, 50.59 implementation, and electronic SNM inventory reports Discussed None PARTIAL LIST OF ACRONYMS USED 10 CFR Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations ADAMS Agencywide Document Access and Management System EHS (Office of) Environmental Health and Safety

-2-EP Emergency Procedure IFI Inspector Follow-up Item IP Inspection Procedure MP Maintenance Procedure MUTR Maryland University Training Reactor NRC Nuclear Regulatory Commission OP Operating Procedure PARS Publicly Available Records Rev. Revision RO Reactor Operator RSC Radiation Safety Committee RSO Radiation Safety Officer SNM Special Nuclear Material SP Surveillance Procedure SRO Senior Reactor Operator TS Technical Specifications URI Unresolved Item

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=IR_05000166/2008201&oldid=2153538"