ML17201Q549: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
(StriderTol Bot change)
 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Adams
#REDIRECT [[IR 05000020/2017201]]
| number = ML17201Q549
| issue date = 07/27/2017
| title = Massachusetts Institute of Technology U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Routine Inspection Report No. 50-020/2017-201
| author name = Mendiola A
| author affiliation = NRC/NRR/DPR/PROB
| addressee name = Queirolo A
| addressee affiliation = Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT)
| docket = 05000020
| license number = R-037
| contact person = Eads J
| document report number = 50-020/2017-201, IR 2017201
| document type = Inspection Report, Letter
| page count = 17
}}
See also: [[see also::IR 05000020/2017201]]
 
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:July 27, 2017
Mr. Al Queirolo, Director
  of Reactor Operations
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Nuclear Reactor Laboratory
Research Reactor
138 Albany Street, MS NW12-116A
Cambridge, MA 02139
SUBJECT:      MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY - U.S. NUCLEAR
              REGULATORY COMMISSION ROUTINE INSPECTION REPORT
              NO. 50-020/2017-201
Dear Dr. Queirolo:
From April 25-27, 2017, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or Commission)
conducted an inspection at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology Research Reactor facility.
The enclosed report documents the inspection results, which were discussed on April 27, 2017,
with you and members of your staff.
The inspection examined activities conducted under your license as they relate to safety and
compliance with Commissions rules and regulations and with the conditions of your license.
The inspector reviewed selected procedures and records, observed activities, and interviewed
personnel. Based on the results of this inspection, no findings of significance were identified.
No response to this letter is required.
In accordance with Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations Section 2.390, Public
inspections, exemptions, requests for withholding, a copy of this letter, its enclosure, and your
response (if any) will be available electronically for public inspection in the NRC Public
Document Room or from the NRCs document system (Agencywide Documents Access and
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).
 
A. Queirolo                                -2-
Should you have any questions concerning this inspection, please contact Mr. Johnny H. Eads at
(301) 415-0136 or by electronic mail at Johnny.Eads@nrc.gov.
                                            Sincerely,
                                            /RA/
                                            Anthony J. Mendiola, Chief
                                            Research and Test Reactors Oversight Branch
                                            Division of Policy and Rulemaking
                                            Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Docket No. 50-020
License No. R-37
Enclosure:
As stated
cc: See next page
 
 
ML17201Q549; *concurred via e-mail                NRC-002
OFFICE        NRR/DPR/PROB*          NRR/DPR/PROB/LA*          NRR/DPR/PROB/BC
NAME          JEads                  NParker                    AMendiola
DATE          7/24/17                7/21/17                    7/27/17
                             
Massachusetts Institute of Technology    Docket No. 50-020
cc:
City Manager
City Hall
Cambridge, MA 02139
Department of Environmental Protection
One Winter Street
Boston, MA 02108
Mr. Jack Priest, Director
Radiation Control Program
Department of Public Health
529 Main Street
Schrafft Center, Suite 1M2A
Charlestown, MA 02129
Mr. John Giarrusso, Chief
Planning and Preparedness Division
Massachusetts Emergency Management Agency
400 Worcester Road
Framingham, MA 01702-5399
Test, Research and Training
  Reactor Newsletter
P.O. Box 118300
University of Florida
Gainesville, FL 32611-8300
Ms. Sarah M. Don, Reactor Superintendent
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Nuclear Reactor Laboratory
Research Reactor
138 Albany Street, MS NW12-116B
Cambridge, MA 02139
 
              U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
              OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION
Docket No.  50-020
License No.  R-37
Report No.  50-020/2017-201
Licensee:    Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Facility:    Nuclear Reactor Laboratory
Location:    Cambridge, Massachusetts
Dates:      April 25-27, 2017
Inspector:  Johnny Eads
Approved by: Anthony J. Mendiola, Chief
            Research and Test Reactors Oversight Branch
            Division of Policy and Rulemaking
            Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
                                                        Enclosure
 
                                      EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
                              Massachusetts Institute of Technology
                                    Nuclear Reactor Laboratory
                          NRC Inspection Report No. 50-020/2017-201
The primary focus of this routine, announced inspection was the onsite review of selected
aspects of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (the licensees) Class I six megawatt
research reactor safety program including: (1) organization and staffing, (2) reactor operations,
(3) operator requalification, (4) maintenance and surveillance, (5) fuel handling, (6) experiments,
(7) procedures, and (8) emergency preparedness since the last U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) inspection of these areas. The licensees program was acceptably directed
toward the protection of public health and safety and in compliance with NRC requirements.
Organization and staffing
*  Organizational structure and staffing were consistent with technical specification (TS)
    requirements.
Reactor Operations
*  Reactor operations were conducted in accordance with procedure and the appropriate logs
    were being maintained.
Operator Requalification
*  Operator requalification was conducted as required by the Requalification Program and the
    program was being maintained up-to-date.
*  Operators were receiving biennial medical examinations as required.
Maintenance and Surveillance
*  The system for tracking and completing maintenance items and surveillance checks and
    calibrations was adequate and was being maintained as required.
*  Maintenance and surveillance records, performance, and reviews satisfied TS and
    procedure requirements.
Fuel Handling
*  Fuel was being controlled as required and fuel movements were conducted in accordance
    with TS and procedural requirements.
Experiments
*  The program for reviewing and conducting experiments satisfied procedural and TS
    requirements.
 
                                              -2-
Procedures
*  The procedure review, revision, control, and implementation program satisfied TS
  requirements.
Emergency Preparedness
*  The emergency preparedness program was conducted in accordance with the Emergency
  Plan (E-Plan).
*  Emergency response equipment was being maintained and inventoried as required.
*  Emergency drills were being conducted annually as required by the E-Plan.
*  Emergency preparedness training for licensed operators and personnel from various
  support organizations was being completed as required.
 
                                          REPORT DETAILS
Summary of Facility Status
The Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT or the licensee) Nuclear Reactor Laboratory
(NRL) six megawatt research and test reactor continued to be operated 24 hours a day, 7 days
a week in support of educational experiments, research and service irradiations, and reactor
operator training. During the inspection, the reactor was shutdown for maintenance.
1.    Organization and Staffing
      a.      Inspection Scope (Inspection Procedure (IP) 69006)
                The inspector reviewed the Massachusetts Institute of Technology Reactor
                (designated as MITR-II) organization and staffing to ensure that the requirements
                of technical specification (TS) 7.1, implemented through Renewed Facility
                Operating License R-37, Amendment 40 issued August 13, 2015, were being
                met regarding the following:
                *  Management responsibilities
                *  Qualifications of facility operations personnel
                *  MIT NRL Organization Chart, dated April 12, 2017
                *  Reactor Digital Logbook covering the period from March 2016 to present
                *  Staffing requirements for reactor operation stated in TS 7.1.3
                *  MIT Research Reactor, Nuclear Reactor Laboratory, Massachusetts Institute
                    of Technology Annual Report to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission for
                    the Period January 1, 2016, to December 31, 2016.
      b.      Observations and Findings
                The inspector noted that the Director of Reactor Operations continued to report
                to the Director of the MIT NRL, who in turn reported to the President of the
                university through the Vice President for Research. This organization was
                consistent with that specified in the TS. The organizational structure and the
                responsibilities of the reactor staff had not changed since the last inspection.
                Staffing levels remained consistent with those noted during the last inspection of
                the facility. The current reactor operations organization consisted of the Director
                of Reactor Operations, the Deputy Director of Reactor Operations, the Assistant
                Director of Operations, the Superintendent of Operations, the Training
                Coordinator, a Quality Assurance Supervisor, and various reactor supervisors,
                and reactor operators (ROs). The Deputy Director of Reactor Operations, the
                Assistant Director of Reactor Operations, the Superintendent of Operations, the
                Quality Assurance Supervisor, the Training Coordinator, and the majority of the
                reactor supervisors were licensed senior reactor operators (SROs). In addition to
                the operations staff, there were various support groups, including a research
                staff, a research development group, a reactor engineering staff, maintenance
                personnel, and a reactor radiation protection group. Through a review of reactor
 
                                            -2-
        operations logs for the period from March 2016 through the present, and through
        interviews with operations personnel, the inspector determined that the licensee
        normally operated 24 hours a day with three crews and no shift rotation. Each
        operating crew was staffed with various personnel (with at least two licensed
        operators on duty at the MITR-II per shift). Operations shifts were scheduled for
        a period of 8 hours. The review of the reactor (console) logbooks and associated
        records confirmed that shift staffing during reactor operations met the minimum
        requirements for duty and on-call personnel specified in TS 7.1.3.
  c.    Conclusion
        The licensees organization and staffing were in compliance with the
        requirements specified in TS 7.1.
2. Reactor Operations
  a.    Inspection Scope (IP 69006)
        To verify that the licensee was conducting reactor operations in accordance with
        TS Sections 2 and 3 and procedural requirements, the inspector reviewed
        selected portions of the following:
        *  Reactor Digital Logbook covering the period from March 2016 to present
        *  MIT Research Reactor, Nuclear Reactor Laboratory, Massachusetts Institute
            of Technology Annual Report to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission for
            the Period January 1, 2016, to December 31, 2016.
  b.    Observations and Findings
        (1)    Reactor Operation
                The inspector observed facility activities on various occasions during the
                week including routine reactor operations and updating the console logs
                while the reactor was shutdown for maintenance. Written procedures and
                checklists were used for each activity as required. It was noted that the
                reactor operators followed the appropriate procedures, were
                knowledgeable of the required actions, and professional in the conduct of
                their duties.
        (2)    Staff Communication
                During the inspection, the inspector observed reactor operator turnover
                activities during the shift. The status of the reactor and the facility was
                discussed on each occasion as required. The oncoming personnel were
                briefed on the upcoming activities and scheduled events before assuming
                the operations duty. Through direct observation and records review, the
                inspector verified that the content of turnover briefings was appropriate
 
                                            -3-
                  and that shift activities and plant conditions were discussed in sufficient
                  detail.
  c.    Conclusion
        MITR-II reactor operations, as well as turnovers and operator cognizance of
        facility conditions during routine operations, were acceptable.
3. Operator Requalification
  a.    Inspection Scope (IP 69003)
        To verify that the licensee was complying with the requirements of Title 10 of the
        Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Part 55 and TS 7.2.3.3 (b) and
        conforming to Chapter 12, Sections 12.1 and 12.10 of the facility safety analysis
        report, the inspector reviewed selected aspects of the following:
        *  Current status of operator licenses
        *  Reactor Digital Logbook covering the period from March 2016 to present
        *  Results of the annual written examinations completed in 2016
        *  Medical examination records for selected operators for the past 2 years
        *  Procedure Manual (PM) 1.16, Requalification and Qualification, latest
            revision dated February 20, 2013.
  b.    Observations and Findings
        There were 21 individuals licensed to operate the reactor at MIT. Of those
        personnel, 15 were qualified SROs and 6 were ROs. A review of various
        Requalification Program records indicated that the program was maintained
        up-to-date and that SRO and RO licenses were current. MITR-II operator files
        and reactor logs also showed that all operators maintained active duty status with
        the exception of one SRO who was designated as inactive by the facility. A
        review of the MITR Safety Committee (MITRSC) meeting minutes and
        independent audit results indicated that the program was being audited annually
        as required by TS 7.2.3.3.(b).
        A review of the pertinent logs and records also showed that training was being
        conducted in accordance with the licensees requalification and training program.
        A series of lectures were given to operators during the 2 year training and
        requalification cycle. Information regarding facility changes, procedure changes,
        and other relevant information was routinely routed to all licensed operators for
        their review. The inspector verified that the required reactor operations, reactivity
        manipulations, other operations activities, and reactor supervisor activities were
        being completed and the appropriate records were being maintained. The
        inspector also noted that all operators were receiving biennial medical
        examinations within the time frame allowed as required by the program.
 
                                            -4-
  c.    Conclusion
        Operator requalification was up-to-date and being completed as required by the
        MITR-II Operator Requalification Program. Operators were receiving biennial
        medical examinations as required.
4. Maintenance and Surveillance
  a.    Inspection Scope (IPs 69006 and 69010)
        To verify that the licensee was meeting the surveillance requirements specified in
        TS Section 4 and that maintenance was being conducted, the inspector reviewed
        selected aspects of the following:
        *  MITR-II Job Workbook
        *  MITR-II Daily Operations Schedule
        *  Reactor Digital Logbook covering the period from March 2016 to present
        *  MIT Research Reactor, Nuclear Reactor Laboratory, Massachusetts Institute
            of Technology Annual Report to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission for
            the Period January 1, 2016, to December 31, 2016.
  b.    Observations and Findings
        (1)    Maintenance
                The inspector reviewed the system that the licensee had developed to
                track and complete maintenance activities. The system was designed to
                ensure that all maintenance activities were planned and completed as
                scheduled, that post maintenance testing was conducted, and that the
                entire process was documented appropriately. The licensee used a
                locally developed system called the Test and Calibration Tracker which
                listed nearly all the tests, checks, and calibrations that were due on a
                monthly basis, as well as MITR-II Systems, Tests, and Calibrations
                notebooks to document completion of the various periodic maintenance
                and surveillance activities. The inspector noted that all such tasks were
                tracked through this system. The program appeared to be effective.
        (2)    Surveillance
                Various periodic surveillance verifications and calibration records of
                equipment, including the testing of various reactor systems,
                instrumentation, and auxiliary systems were reviewed by the inspector.
                TS surveillance items were completed on schedule as required by TS and
                in accordance with licensee procedures. The results of selected tests,
                checks, and calibrations reviewed by the inspector were noted to be
                within the TS and procedurally prescribed parameters.
 
                                          -5-
  c.    Conclusion
        The system for tracking and completing maintenance items and surveillance
        checks and calibrations was adequate and was being maintained as required.
        Maintenance and surveillance records, performance, and reviews satisfied TS
        and procedure requirements.
5. Fuel Handling
  a.    Inspection Scope (IP 69009)
        To ensure that the licensee was following the requirements of TSs 3.1.4, 3.1.6,
        4.1.5, and 5.4, the inspector reviewed selected aspects of the following:
        *  Reactor Digital Logbook covering the period from March 2016 to present
        *  Approved packets for core configurations completed in 2016 and 2017,
            including:
                      Fuel Loading Permission Form (form revision dated
                        February 20, 2013), completed for fuel element transfers in 2016
                        and 2017 to date
  b.    Observations and Findings
        The inspector reviewed the fuel movement process and verified that fuel moves
        were conducted according to established procedure and documented on specific
        fuel movement sheets developed by the Reactor Engineer. The inspector
        reviewed selected fuel movement sheets for 2016 and to date in 2017. They had
        been developed and used for each specific core refueling as required.
  c.    Conclusion
        Fuel was being controlled as required and fuel movements were performed in
        accordance with approved procedures and TS requirements.
6. Experiments
  a.    Inspection Scope (IP 69005)
        To verify compliance with the licensees procedures, TSs 6, 7.5, and
        10 CFR 50.59 the inspector reviewed the following:
        *  Reactor Digital Logbook covering the period from March 2016 to present
        *  Experiment Review Process documented in PM 1.10, Experiment Review
            and Approval, latest revision dated February 20, 2013.
  b.    Observations and Findings
        The inspector reviewed the experimental review and approval process described
        in PM 1.10. The inspector reviewed selected safety review forms and irradiation
 
                                            -6-
        request forms for experiments that were currently active. The experimental
        facilities and/or equipment had been evaluated in accordance with TS
        requirements and the associated data sheets indicated that the experiments
        would be within the specified limits. The analysis for each had been performed
        and the reviews and approvals completed. The appropriate reviews and
        approvals had also been completed for the samples and/or materials to be
        irradiated and the experiments were conducted under the cognizance of the
        reactor supervisor and in accordance with the specified requirements.
  c.    Conclusion
        Conduct and control of experiments met the requirements of the TS and the
        applicable facility procedures.
7. Procedures
  a.    Inspection Scope (IP 69008)
        To verify that the licensee was meeting the requirements of TS 7.4, the
        inspectors reviewed selected aspects of the following:
            PM 1.4, Review and Approval of Plans, Procedures and Facility Equipment
            and Changes Thereto, which included:
                      -  PM 1.4.1, Plan, Procedure, and Equipment Change
                          Classification, latest revision dated February 20, 2013
                      -  PM 1.4.2, Class C Review and Approval, latest revision dated
                          February 20, 2013
                      -  PM 1.4.3, Class B Review and Approval, latest revision dated
                          February 20, 2013
                      -  PM 1.4.4, Class A Review and Approval, latest revision dated
                          February 20, 2013
                      -  PM 1.4.5, Safety Review Form, latest revision dated
                          February 20, 2013
                      -  PM 1.4.6, Procedure Manuals, latest revision dated
                          February 20, 2013
            PM 1.5, Procedure Adherence and Temporary Change Method, latest
            revision dated February 20, 2013
  b.    Observations and Findings
        The inspector noted that procedures had been developed for reactor operations
        and safety as required by the TS 7.4. The licensees procedures were found to
        be acceptable for the current facility status and staffing level. The inspector
        noted that the administrative procedure specified the responsibilities of the
        various positions and for the MITRSC.
 
                                        -7-
        Operations procedures were typically reviewed by operators and support
        personnel prior to being used/implemented and were revised as needed. The
        inspector noted that abnormal and emergency procedures were reviewed
        annually by all licensed operators as required and revised when needed. Major
        procedure revisions were reviewed and approved by the Director of Reactor
        Operations and submitted to the MITRSC for review. All procedure changes
        were routinely routed to all operators for review as well.
        It was also noted that management and supervisory oversight was focused on
        proper implementation and adherence to procedures. Through observation of
        various activities in progress during the inspection, the inspector noted that
        adherence to procedures was adequate.
  c.  Conclusion
        Procedures were properly prepared and implemented in compliance with license
        requirements.
8. Emergency Preparedness
  a.  Inspection Scope (IP 69011)
        The inspector reviewed selected aspects to verify compliance with TS 7.2.3.d
        and the licensees Emergency Plan and associated procedures of the following:
        *    Training records for MITR Support Personnel
        *    Review and Critique of the 2016 Emergency Exercise conducted on
              August 16, 2016
        *    Review and Critique of the 2016 actual medical emergencies which occurred
              on February 13, 2016 and July 6, 2016
        *    PM 4.0, MITR-II Emergency Plan and Procedures, revision dated
              June 20, 2013
        *    PM 4.4.4, Emergency Operating Procedures
  b.  Observations and Findings
        The inspector reviewed the Emergency Plan (EP) and implementing procedures
        in use at the reactor and verified that the procedures were reviewed annually by
        all licensed operators in accordance with the Operator Requalification Program.
        Through records reviews and interviews with facility emergency personnel (i.e.,
        licensed operators or emergency responders), the inspector determined that they
        were knowledgeable of the proper actions to take in case of an emergency.
        Training for staff members had been conducted annually as required and
        documented acceptably.
        Emergency training for MIT Police Department personnel was required to be
        conducted annually by EP Section 4.10.1.1. The inspector reviewed the training
        records and noted that the most recent training had been completed as required.
 
                                            -8-
          The inspector verified that letters of agreement with various emergency support
          organizations were on file and being maintained.
          Communications capabilities with support groups were acceptable and were
          verified annually through a communications check with the various organizations.
          Emergency call lists had been revised and updated as needed and were
          available in various areas of the facility, including in controlled copies of the
          Emergency Procedures Manuals. The inspector also verified that emergency
          equipment was being inventoried quarterly as required.
          The inspector verified compliance with the EP requirement for annual emergency
          plan drills. The licensee met this requirement by conducting radiological
          emergency and medical emergency drills each year or by taking credit for an
          actual emergency. Following each drill, a critique was conducted to identify
          areas of strength and weakness. Drills and critiques were documented in writing
          as referenced above. The drills appeared to be challenging and provided a good
          indication of each organizations responsiveness and capabilities.
  c.      Conclusion
          The licensee was maintaining acceptable emergency preparedness in
          accordance with TS and E-Plan requirements.
9. Exit Interview
  The inspection scope and results were summarized on April 27, 2017, with members of
  licensee management. The inspector described the areas inspected and discussed the
  preliminary inspection findings. The licensee acknowledged the results of the inspection
  and did not identify as proprietary any of the material provided to or reviewed during the
  inspection.
 
                          PARTIAL LIST OF PERSONS CONTACTED
Licensee Personnel:
J. Bernard          Senior Advisor, Research Staff
S. Don              Superintendent Operations
J. Foster          Deputy Director of Reactor Operations
E. Lau              Assistant Director of Reactor Operations
W. McCarthy        Reactor Radiation Protection Officer and Deputy Director, MIT
                    Environment, Health, and Safety Office
A. Queirolo        Director of Reactor Operations
S. Tucker          Quality Assurance Supervisor
                          INSPECTION PROCEDURES USED
IP 69003    Class 1 Research and Test Reactor Operator Licenses, Requalification, and
                    Medical Examinations
IP 69005    Class 1 Research and Test Reactor Experiments
IP 69006    Class 1 Research and Test Reactors Organization and Operations and
                    Maintenance Activities
IP 69008    Class 1 Procedures
IP 69009    Class 1 Research and Test Reactor Fuel Movement
IP 69010    Class 1 Research and Test Reactor Surveillance
IP 69011    Class 1 Research and Test Reactor Emergency Preparedness
                      ITEMS OPENED, CLOSED, AND DISCUSSED
Opened:
None
Closed:
None
 
                        LIST OF ACRONYMS USED
CFR    Code of Federal Regulations
EP    Emergency Plan
IP    Inspection Procedure
MIT    Massachusetts Institute of Technology
MITR  Massachusetts Institute of Technology Reactor
MITRSC Massachusetts Institute of Technology Reactor Safety Committee
NRC    U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
NRL    Nuclear Reactor Laboratory
PM    Procedure Manual
RO    Reactor Operator
SRO    Senior Reactor Operator
TS    Technical Specification
}}

Latest revision as of 16:55, 8 January 2025

Redirect to:

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML17201Q549&oldid=5128772"