ML19263B474
| ML19263B474 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Wood River Junction |
| Issue date: | 12/11/1978 |
| From: | NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19263B469 | List: |
| References | |
| 70-0820-78-25, 70-820-78-25, NUDOCS 7901180289 | |
| Download: ML19263B474 (8) | |
Text
.
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSi'ECTION AND ENFORCEMENT Region I Report No. 70-820/78-25 Docket No.70-820 Safeguards Group 1
License No.
SNM-777 Priority I
Category UR Licensee:
United Nuclear Corporation Wood River Junction, Rhode Island 02894 Facility Name:
Fuel Recovery Operation Inspection at:
Wood River Junction, Rhode Island Inspectioncond0ctedS November 13-17, 1978 Inspectors:
M l A. 7 _ 7 y A. Gody,' Safeguards Inspector date signed a
h b[,,b l 2-I t 7 E D. Holody safeguards Statistician date signed
[C h
17 - (l M T. Shaub, Safeguards Technician date signed 1[ 1 12 - ) t 7 3 Biss tt, Safeguards Auditor date signed
/, M D
/ 1 7 t' T/Jdckson,IRadiatibn Specialist (Intern) date signed f m).Wuk
)1-7-79 Approved by:
a h c,q J. H. Joyner, Chief, Nuclear Material date signed 3
Control Support Section, Safeguards Branch Inspection Summary:
Inspection on November 13-17, 1978 (Report No. 70-820/78-25)
Areas Inspected:
Rou ti ne, announced inspection by 5 regional based inspectors of nuclear material control and accountability in the areas of measurements and statistical control (including independent measurements); ID and LEID; shipping and receiving; records and reports; and, a review of outstanding items.
The in-spection involved 150 inspector-hours on site by five NRC regional based inspectors.
Results:
Of the five areas inspected, no items of noncompliance were identified.
Region 1 Form 12 (Rev. April 77) 290118028%
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted
- A. Clark, Acting Plant Manager
- R. Gregg, Quality Assurance Manager
- T. Ashley, Quality Assurance Engineer L. Lafond, Accountability Assistant J. O'Donnell, Nuclear Materials Assistant J. Deluty, Plant Chemist P. Dessaules, Contract Engineer The inspectors also interviewed other licensee employees during the course of the inspection.
These included operators and nuclear material control personnel.
denotes those present at the exit interview 2.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings (Closed) Unresolved Item (78-11-02):
Failure to checkweigh standards on the table top counterbalance (product scale) over the range of the material being measurad.
This item is not required by the licensee's current license conditions or present NRC regulations.
The licensee does calibrate the scale against standards over the range of operation.
(0 pen) Unresolved Item (78-17-01):
Independent assessment of licensee errors on dissolver solution.
The analytical results on dissolver solution had not been reported by the New Brunswick Laboratory at the time of the inspection.
This item will remain unresolved until the results are obtained and reviewed.
(0 pen) Unresolved Item (78-17-02):
Statistically significant shipper /
receiver differences with UNC-NPD exist for HEU processed during April-May, 1978.
The licensee has taken appropriate investigative action and identified the cause of the S/R difference as an improper allocation of material.
The licensee will take corrective action with the issuance of corrected material transaction reports.
This item will remain unresolved until the corrected documents (Form NRC-741) are issued.
(Closed) Unresolved Item (78-17-03):
Containers of scrap remeasured by the licensee during the period April 4,1978 through June 5,1978 may have an associated uncertainty greater than + 10%.
The licensee's calculated uncertainty for the April-June period was reviewed and found to be + 9.9%.
The average uncertainty for a period of ten months, four months on either side of the April-June period, was + 7.9%.
This item is closed and further review of the licensee's measurement of scrap will be conducted in future inspections.
3 (Closed) Unresolved Item (78-17-04):
The low enriched uranium physical inventory for the period December 1,1977 to June 5,1978 was not conducted within 6 calendar months. However, on November 17, 1977, the licensee had submitted to NMSS a change to their FNMC Plan stating:
"The cutoff date, determined by the General Manager, shall be the first Monday, or the first workday after the first Monday of eacn inventory month." The June 5,1978 date occurred within this time frame.
NRC-NMSS verbally accepts the change to the licensee's FNMC.
(Closed) Unresolved Item (78-17-05):
ine inventory difference and its associated limit of error for the June, 1978 inventory required review.
Since the inventory difference of 252 grams U and 122 grams U-235 did not exceed both its associated limit of error (1 gram U and 1 gram U-235) and 9,000 grams U-235, the licensee is not required to take any action regarding the inventory difference.
3.
Shipper / Receiver Differences A review of the final results of a segregated scrap recovery campaign of UNC-NPD scrap was performed.
The licensee conducted a scrap recovery campaign, during August-September,1978, of UNC-NPD scrap exclusively.
The licensee conducted the campaign in order to deter-mine the cause of recent S/R differences. There were five different material types recovered.
The licensee segregated the material types and maintained the separation throughout all phases of the recovery campaign.
The differences between UNC-FR05 recovered quantities of SNM and UNC-NPD's stated values exceeded twice the licensee's LEt for all material types, for both element and isotopic values, except for the isotopic quantity associated with the recovery of scrap feed material.
The licensee evaluated all data and determined that a statistically significant S/R difference exists from the August-September,1978 campaign.
The licensee is investigating and reconciling the dif-ference with UNC-NPD.
The results of the investigation and the manner of reconciliation will be reviewed during a future inspection.
The licensee intends to initiate another scrap recovery campaign of UNC-NPD scrap.
The campaign will commence the last week in November, 1978, for an approximate duration of four weeks.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
4 4.
Measurement and Statistical Control The inspection covered the licensee's compliance with the require-ments of Section 4 of MPP-2 to License SNM-777.
Implementation of License Conditions 4.0 - 4.7 was rev ewed.
License Conditions i
4.8 - 4.9 will be reviewed during a subsequent inspection.
The areas reviewed consisted of (a) measurement points and the ap-plicable measurement systems, (b) the calibration and control of these systems, (c) the generation of data from both replicate measurements of process materials and the measurement of standards, (d) the use of these data for both error and bias determinations and also measurement control, and (e) the use of the errors in limit of error calculations, including LEID.
There was no identification of a need for any additional measure-ment points. Additions to process are measured as dissolver sclutions, residues, ash or filtrates, and removals from process are measared as either finished product, scrap, waste, or effluents.
Material accumulated on filters is also measured at each inventory.
The measurement systems used for the majority of material consist of assay scales for the weighing of dissolver solution, a counter balance for the weighing of final product, chemical titration for the analysis of percent uranium in both dissolver solutions and finished product, and mass spectroscopy, performed by UNC-Naval Products Division, for enrichment determinations on the dissolver solutions and finished product.
Additional measurements consist of a whole bottle counter used to assign grams of U-235 to residues and calcined ash, a drum counter for the same determination on waste, and a filter counter for the same determination on filters.
Liquid effluent discharges to the lagoon are measured using a flowmeter and fluorimetric analysis.
Stack releases are measured using an airmeter and alpha counting.
All measurement systems are either (1) calibrated over the range of operations, and the calibration is routinely checked, or (2) recali-brated whenever measurements are performed.
In the former case, the calibration checks of some measurement systems do not cover the range of operations.
Measurement data are gathered for all systems.
Replicate measurements of process materials are performed for all systems except scales.
These data are used to obtain random analytical and random sampling errors.
Standards are also measured by each system to determine
5 any bias associated with the system, and also to monitor and con-trol its performance.
Systematic error variance, referred to as
" limits of systematic error" in 10 CFR 70.57(a)(7), is only calcu-lated for scales.
The limits of systematic error for the other systems are not calculated and used in limit of error calculations (incluaing LEID).
This will be required when the licensee's measure-ment control plan is approved, since 10 CFR 70.57 becomes a require-ment for the licensee upon approval of that plan.
The inspector reviewed the control charts which are maintained for the scales and chemical analytical methods R r the purpose of monitoring and controlling measurement performance.
Control charts for the nondestructive assay systems were not reviewed.
This review covered the three material balance periods between April 4 and October 2, 1978.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
5.
Independent Tests of the Licensee's Measurement Systems a.
Nendestructive assay measurements were performed using the Isotopic Source Adjustable Fissemeter (ISAF) and the Multi-channel Analyzer (MCA) with a sodium iodide detector to measure 62 bottles of calcined ash.
Due to problems encoun-tered with matrix inconsistencies in those bottles containing greater than 50 grams U-235, a statistical evaluation of calcined ash measured by the inspectors, was limited to those bottles with a licensee assigned value of approximately 50 grams of U-235 or less.
Bottles of calcined ash with greater than 50 grams U-235, assigned by the licensee's whole bottle gamma NDA measurement system, are normally sampled for chemi-cal assay.
Bottles which apparently contain greater than 100 grams of U-235 are always sampled.
The licensee's assigned value in the sampled populations and the NRC estimate of the total amount in the sampled popula-tions are as follows:
6 Difference Limit of Number Measurement UNC-FR0 NRC UNC-NRC Error of System Grams U-235 Grams U-235 Gg ms U-235 Grams U-235 Bottles ISAF 546 51 8 28 1 70 21 MCA 577 609
-32 1 58 22 The licensee's stated total quantity of SNM in the sampled populations is within a 95% confidence interval of the NRC's estimates of SNM in the sampled populations.
b.
The licensee measures waste for burial with a drum scanning system (single channel analyzer with an NaI detector).
The system is calibrated from zero to 200 grams U-235.
The in-spectors prepared standards, using Region I's planar standards and a 55 gallon drum filled with cardboard and plastic, to evaluate the accuracy of the licensee's measurement system.
The results of the licensee's measuremeits are as follows:
UNC-FR0 NRC Standard Difference UNC-NRC Test No.
Assigned Grams U-23_5_
1.0 1.0 0
2 7.8 7.0 0.8 3
3.2 3.6
-0.4 4
8.7 10.7
-2.0 5
11.5 12.0
-0.5 6
11.0 12.3
-1.3 7
15.0 14.6 0.4 8
19.5 18.3 1.2 9
20.0 19.0 1.0 10 21.5 21.2 0.3 11 24 5 26.0
-1. 5 12 36.0 33.5 2.5 13 31.5 31.6 0.9 14 32.0 31.6 0.4 15 37.5 36.5 1.0 16 39.0 33.5 5.5 Average Difference:
0.41 Standard Deviation of Average Difference:
1 0.44 Limit of Error of Average Difference:
1 0.87
7 c.
The inspectors performed checkweighings on the licensee's assay tank scales and production scales used for accounta-bility.
All scales were checked over the range of opera-tion with Region I's class "S" weights.
No scales were found to deviate more than one increment from the expected value.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
6.
ID and Its Associated LEID The ID calculations were reviewed for the three material balances covering the period April 4 to October 2,1978.
In no case did the " current period" ID exceed both its LEID and 300 grams U-235.
Consequently, the licensee is not required to take any action re-garding these inventory differences.
Review of the ID calculations was performed by checking records and source documentation as de-scribed in paragraph 7.
For each of the three periods, the LEID did not exceed the LEID cri-teria (0.5% of larger of additions to or removals from process) specified in 10 CFR 70.51(e)(5). The inspector reviewed the LEID calculations for each of the three periods and determined that they are in compliance with present requirements.
However with the ex-ception of scales, limits of systematic error are not considered in the calculations.
This will become a requirement with the approval by NRC-NMSS of the measurement control plan. Aspects of the LEID calculations were described in paragraph 4.
The process operation was evaluated to determine if any loss mechanism existed which could contribute to any inventory differences. No evaluated loss mechanisms were identified.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
7.
Records and Reports The inspector reviewed the latest SNM inventory report covering the material balance period of August 8 through October 2,1978.
All of the line items on the report were audited to the source documents and cross checked to the records maintained by the licensee. Along with this review, the licensee's monthly report of Material Discards and ID for the month of October, 1978, was reviewed for completeness, ac-curacy and timely submission.
No discrepancies were noted.
8 Also the inspector insured that the licensee's book inventory had been reconciled with and adjusted to the results of the October 2, 1978 physical inventory.
The licensee had been granted a ten day extension, to November 11, 1978, for completing the require-ments of 10 CFR 70.51(e)(4), provided the uranium ID values be reported on or before November 1, 1978.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
8.
Exit Interview The inspectors met with licensee representatives (denoted in Para-graph 1) at the conclusion of the inspection on November 17, 1978.
The inspectors summarized the scope and findings of the inspection.
The licensee was informed that since an inventory difference oc-curred for the June, 1978, low enriched uranium inventory, even though no material processing had taken place, storage and internal controls, as well as, the entire accounting system for low enriched material, would be reviewed during a subsequent inspection.
.