ML19296D058
| ML19296D058 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Framatome ANP Richland |
| Issue date: | 01/21/1980 |
| From: | Book H, Cooley W, Soong A NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19296D040 | List: |
| References | |
| 70-1257-79-09, 70-1257-79-9, NUDOCS 8002290293 | |
| Download: ML19296D058 (9) | |
Text
@
U. S. tiUCLEAR REGUIATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT REGIJN V 09 Report No.
70-1257/79-W Docket No.
70-1257 License No.
SNM-1227 safeguards Group i
Licensee:
Exxon Nuclear Connany 2101 Porn Danids Road Richland. Washinoton 99352 ww Facility Name:
Richland Facility Inspection at:
Richland, Washinoton Inspection conducted: Novenber 27-30, 1979 Inspectors:
khIk)f h
/
/
W. J. Cooley, Euel F ilities Inspector p' ate Signed Acccmpanying Personnel:
R. L. Stevenson, f4 MSS, flRC HQ
,[j\\n-LiangSong,flMSS flRC Hg, j
6.
c4K
//2 / / 30 Approve vi
/
/
H. E. Book, Chief, F0'el Facility and Materials I
Dale Signed Safety Branch S u=na ry :
09 Insoection on flovember 27-30,1979 (Report flo. 79-1257/79-M)
Areas Insoected:
Organization; Facility Changes and Modifications; Internal Audit and Review; Safety Committee Activities: Operations Review; Transporta-tion Program / Packaging of low Level Waste Containers; Criticality Safety; En-vironnental Program; Emergency Plans and Procedures.
The inspection involved twenty-nine inspector-hours onsite by one inspector.
Resul ts:
flo items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
I RV Form 219 (2) s00s290293
DETAILS 1.
Dersons Contacted
- D. L. Cornell, "anager, Manufacturing
- 1. G. Hill, Supervisor, Chemical Operations L. E. Hansen, Senior Specialist, Criticality Safety and Physical Security
- R. H. Purcell, Yanager, Auxiliary Operations T. C. Probasco, Engineer, Nuclear and Industrial Safety
- R. L. Miles, Supervisor, Radiological Safety
- H. P. Estey, 'lanager, License and Compliance, Operating Facilities
- R.
H. Schutt, Specialist, Criticality Safety D. E. Clark, Senior Engineering Assistant, Licensing and Coroliance
- Denotes those attending the exit interview.
2.
Organization
'tr.
'1. L. Smith, Consultant, Licensing and Compliance has terminated en-oloynent with the subject licensee.
H. Paul Estey has been named Manager, Licensina and Compliance, Operating Facilities.
3.
Facility Chances and flodifications A nunber of changes in facilities planned by the licensee were listed in Section 2 of IE NRC Report No. 70-1257/79-06.
Those changes are being reviewed by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in connection with the l' men-see's renewal application for the subject license. The installation of a uranium contaninated clothing laundering facility has been authorized by arendrent to the subject license and was about to be installed at the time of this inspection.
The licensee has completed the relocation of contaminated raterial stor-age mentioned in section two of NRC IE Report No. 70-1257/79-06. The licensee has discontinued almost all of his trailer storage of fissile naterial by providing storage facilities within the UO2 building.
The only raterial stored in a trailer is a special enrichment used for enrich-nent blending purposes.
Three safe-slab type tanks and associated piping in the scrao recovery area were being replaced at the time of this inspection.
Two of the tanks had bulged as a result of a pressurization event which is discussed in more detail below in Section 8 of this report.
4 Internal Review and Audit Independent criticality reviews and audits are conducted by representa-tives of Auxiliary Operations and of Licensing and Compliance.
This in-spection included a review of reports of those audits for the period June 8 thru t!cvember 14, 1979.
Licensing and Compliance conducted five reviews while Auxiliary Operations conducted 10 reviews of aspects of nuclear safety control throughout the site.
Recommendations for improve-ment included corrections and labeling and posting; the use of an unauth-orized container; the addition of two five gallon cans storage spaces prior to approval; and the labeling of enriched uranium powder cans indicating moderation control.
The labeling of moderation-controlled containers of enriched uranium was a persistent problem and an alternative solution was sought. The solution decided upon was to post moderation-controlled areas (includira conveyors) with instructions and to delineate those areas using a dis-tinctive black and white adhesive tape.
It was determined that the sp. :ial labeling of individual containers would then be unnecessary.
That type of moderation control was being implemented at the time of this inspection.
Additionally, the decision had been made to place greater emphasis on the technology of criticality control during reviews conducted by Licensing and Compliance. The Licensing and Compliance review would empha-size changes in dimensions, maintenance of alam systems; changes in hard-ware and processes.
The Auxiliary Operations review would emphasize place-ment of fissile materials; appropriateness and accuracy of Criticality Safety Specifications and procedures; and adherence to procedures.
fRC IE Inspection Report 70-1257/79-06, Section 3 mentioned as a sig-nificant problem relatively high airborne concentrations of uranium in the nen's change room of the UO2 building. Those concentrations have been reduced by improvements in ventilation and relocation of air sampling equipment. Additional work remains including the installation of the on-site contaminated clothing laundry.
5.
Safety Comittee Activities This inspection included a review of the licensee's Health and Safety Council meeting minutes for the months of June thru October,1979.
6.
Onerations Review This inspection included visits to the UO2 building including its con-version areas 1 and 2 and the scrap recovery area.
It was observed that construction including the replacement of safe-slab tanks and piping, the rebuilding of solvent extraction columns, and the installation of mixer-settler units was on-going.
7.
Transoortation Proarams/f RC TI 2600/1 Packaginn This inspection included an in-office and on-site review of the licensee's response to IE Bulletin fio. 79-19.
The adequacy of the licensee's response was verified primarily by discussions with a licensee representative.
This inspection included observation of about six barrels of low level radioactive waste.
fio barrel damage was observed.
f!o obvious leakage was observed from the barrels.
Adequate labeling was being applied to the barrels.
Radiation levels 6t the surface of these barrels was typically less than 2 mP,em/hr.
A naximum fissile content per barrel is less than 15 grams U235. Those barrels were part of a shipment planned for fluclear Engineering Company, Richland, Washington.
The licensee has stored onsite about two thousand barrels of typical low level radioactive waste each containing more than 15 grams containing 235 and which are being stored in anticipation of a uranium waste recovery program.
The inspection included opening one of the six barrels of waste being prepared for observation of its contents.
It was observed that the barrel contained no residual liquid but did hold typical low level waste contained in a plastic bag liner.
The licensee's response to the fluclear Regulatory Comission IE %11etin flo. 79-19 was dated September 25, 1979 and was reviewed prior to ar d during the presently reported inspection with licensee representatives.
The contents of the licensee's reply and his actions taken in response to that bulletin were verified during this inspection.
8.
Criticality Safety Some equirment changes planned for the licensee scrap recovery area have been mentioned in Section 3 above in this report.
On October 17, 1979 the licensee discovered that two of three available safe-slab tanks used in the scrap recovery area to contain dissolver output had bulged. Use of the tanks was discontinued and a plan of action dated October 18, 1979 was developed. That plan included rerouting the solution flow to other available safe-geometry tanks; isolation, cleaning, removal, and disposal of the bulged tank,; disassembly and cleaning of the tank vent lines; and replacement of two of the three tanks.
The design of the replacement tanks called for additional angle iron support; the addition of pins tieing the slab-tank walls to dimensions; and the provisien of pressure relief or venting and overflow for the new tanks.
During this inspection the maximun tank bow experienced was measured and determined to be 2.5 inches at the center of one of the tanks.
The nomal thickness dimension of that tank was SS inches before bowing giving a rax-imum dimension of 8 inches.
The just critical dimension for an infinite slab at 59 enrichment is 8.8 inches, fully reflected.
A review of enrichment throughput dating from April, 1978 indicated all enrichments used in this scrap recovery area where less than 47 U235.
The critical infinite slab dimensions at 4 ' enrichnent is 11.2 inches, fully reflected.
The cause of the tank bulging could not be determined.
Included as possible causes were partially plugged vent lines along with excessive transfer pumo pressures; metal fatigue aggravated by corrosion; and the high specific gravity of the nitrate solution stored; or a combination of those.
The licensee had completed critic,.lity cnalytical work for the install-ation of nixture-settler units and slab tanks for the storage of nixer-settler output. Primary controls on both the mixer-settlers and the slab tanks are enrichment and equipment dimensions.
A tamped density of 0.88 grams U/cc is accepted by the licensee as a maximun density.
A maximun material buckling for that density was taken from the Criticality Hand-book, ARH-600, Volume 2, for 5% enriched material.
Corresponding keffs were calculated for the fully reflected case.
9.
Environmental Surveillance The licensee's environmental program includes the collection of air, soil and vegetation samples. Ambient samples are collected monthly at distances ranging from 450 ft. to 3 miles from the Richland facility.
Those samples are analyzed for fluorine.
Guarterly soil samples are collected at the same sampling stations.
Samples obtained at 450 ft. and 2000 ft.
northeast of the facility are analyzed for uranium and plutonium.
All other soil samples are saved for future analysis as required. Vegetation sanoles are obtained during the growing season on a nonthly and quarterly basis. Monthly vegetation sanples at 450 f t. and 2000 ft. northeast of the facility are analyzed for uranium, plutonium, and fluorine.
Veg-etation samples collected quarterly northeast and southeast of the facility are analyzed for fluorine.
A vegetation sample collected nonthly, three quarters of a nile east of the facility is analyzed nonthly for fluorine.
A liquid effluent sample is obtained at the Richland nunicipal sewage treatment plant monthly and analyzed for uranium, plutonium, and ionic content.
A sludge sample is also obtained at that station and analyzed quarterly for uranium and plutoniun. A background water sample is ob-tained monthly from the Yakima River at West Richland and analyzed for uraniun and ionic content.
. This inspection included a review of environmental sample analytical results available for the years 1978 and 1979.
That review indicated samples were being obtained at the required locations and frequencies.
Plutonium analytical results were 0.5 dpm/g for vegetation and 0.025 dom /g for soil samples.
The maxirum uranium results for vegetation samples were about 0.08 ppm Maximum uraniun results for soil samples were approximately 0.4 ppm.
Fluoride results in vegetation samples indicated average values of 100 ppm.
Fluoride ion determined in ambient air samples indicated maximum concentrations of about 0.4 ppb.
Ambient air sanole analysis is done by Coors, Colorado.
Vegetation and soil analytical work is done by U. S. Testing Company, Richland, Washing-ington.
- 10. Energency Plans and Procedures The licensee maintains contacts with a number of organizations in the Richland, Washington area which are capable of rendering assistance in the event of an emergency.
Those contacts are documented in the form of contracts and statements as to the emergency services which can be made available.
Those contacts are updated approximately each two years and the licensee was in the process of that updating at the time of this inspection.
Emergency support arrangements have been made with Battelle florthwest Laboratories, Richland City Police Department, Richland Fire Department, Benton County Emergency Services, fluclear Engineering Company U. S. Testing Company, Department of Energy and its prime contractor Rockwell International, and the florthwest Health Services.
Those con-tacts are prepared to supply exposure measurements and evaluations, security and fire protection services, waste disposal services, laboratory ana-lytical work, specialized emergency equipment, and energency medical ser-vices.
The licensee has acquired and equipped a mobile emergency command post which is a gasoline powered van.
That van is normally stationed onsite toward the west of the facilities at the emergency assembly area.
The van may be noved to other locations onsite or to locations off site thus providing relocation of the energency command post.
The equipment in the van includes plant drawings, telephone and radio communication, special protective clothing, radiation detection instronentation, self-contained breathing apparatus, first aid equipment, and energency medical technician emergency kits. Additional instrumentation, protective clothing, and specialized equipment is located also in a nearby office facility.
Monthly inventory checks and operability checks on energency equipment are made by personnel of the radiological safety group.
. Four first aid stations have been established at the Richland facilities including the robile van.
Enercency crew rerbers and health physics technicians have been trained in advanced first aid. "anagement nersonnel have been trained in basic first aid.
Emerqency crew training in advanced first aid was last accomo-lished in.!uly, 1978.
Training in fire control for emerqency crew nerbers was last completed in Noverher,1978.
Training of energency crew rembers in radiciogical emergencies was last corpleted in 'Isy,1979 and the same eersonnel conoleted training in the use of self-contained breathing appar-atus in August, 1979.
This inspection included a review of criticues of criticality evacuation drills conducted by the licensee during 1979.
Criticality drills were conducted on February 28, 1979 and August 29, 1979.
Critiques of the drills were detailed and indicated they had run smoothly.
The failure of one Klaxon during the February,1979 drill was noted. The drills typically are designed to force re-entry.
This is done on some occasions by arranging that certain enployees be " missing" as detemined by personnel accountability procedures upon evacuation.
The drills are typically announced by letter which gives specific responsibilities and require-nents during the exercise.
The P,ichland Fire Departtent visits the licensee's facility annually.
The licensee provides enployee training in the use of fire extinguishers approximately twice each year.
Although emergency crews are provided training in hose and fire extinguishers, the licensee colicy is to allow the emergency crews to back off and pemit the Rich-land Fire Department to operate independently.
Physical inspections addressed to industrial safety matters including fire prevention are conducted weekly by a representative of Auxiliary Operations; nonthly by the Health and Safety Council; aporoxirately annually by a representative of Anerican Nuclear Insurers; and a nonthly check of the operability of fire extinguishers is conducted by contractor help.
This insoection included a revieu of two fire and safety protective equin-ment insoection reports of inspections conducted on November 19 and 26, 1979. The inspection reports which were in the fom of check off lists addressed fire extinguishers, automatic Halon systens, safety equioment includinq first aid equipment, housekeeping and flamable storage, and the condition of autonatic fire detection and suporession equipnent.
- 11. Managenent Interview The scope and results of this inspection were discussed with licensee representatives at the conclusion of the inspection on November 30, 1979.
These persons were infomed that no items of noncompliance were observed within the scope of the inspection.