ML20027C271
| ML20027C271 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 07001201 |
| Issue date: | 09/15/1982 |
| From: | Evans C, Montgomery D NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20027C267 | List: |
| References | |
| 70-1201-82-14, NUDOCS 8210150219 | |
| Download: ML20027C271 (3) | |
Text
.
O ** "%g UNITED STATES t
jo,,
NUCLEAR REEULATORY COMMISSION
[
g REGION ll 101 MARIETTA ST., N.W., SUITE 3100 D
- j ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303 Report No. 70-1201/82-14 Licensee
- Babcock and Wilcox Company Commercial Nuclear Fuel Plant Lynchburg, VA 24505 Facility Name: Commercial Nuclear Fuel Plant Docket No. 70-1201 License No. SNM-1168 Inspection at Conin
' Nuclear Fuel Plant near Lynchburg, VA.
In ectar:
rf91
]
/l/A.4/~/if'
/'
C. D. Evan
{ ate Signed Approved y:
sfp Jpp )
//$'4 84 d.'hP0 D
s
SUMMARY
Inspection on September 1-2, 1982 Areas Inspected This routine, unannounced inspection involved 11 inspector-hours on site in the areas of quality control and confirmatory measurements including: review of the laboratory quality control program; review of radiochemistry procedures and records; liquid and gaseous effluent sampling and accountability; and the collec-tion of effluent samples for alpha analyses by the NRC Laboratory.
Results Of the areas inspected, no violations or deviations were identified in 3 areas.
ADOCK 07001201 C
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted Licensee Employees
- R. A. Alto, Plant Manager
- C. W. Speight, Manager, Facilities Control
- J. Ficor, Manager, QA
- D. W. Zelff, Manager, Materials Management
- R. L. Vinton, Senior Health Physicist
- K. E. Shy, Health and Safety Foreman
- Attended exit interview 2.
Exit Interview The inspection scope and findings were sumarized on September 2,1982, with those persons indicated in paragraph 1 above.
3.
Unresolved Items Unresolved items were not identified during this inspection.
4.
Laboratory Quality Control Program The inspector reviewed the laboratory quality control program in the following areas, a.
Assignment of Responsibility and Authority to Manage and Conduct the QC Program.
The Health and Safety Foreman is responsible for the day-to-day opera-tion of the counting room. Specific procedures and routine laboratory l
practices have been established and implemented that address various aspects of laboratory qua'lity control.
b.
Provisions for Revicw and Audits There are no specific requirements for review of quality control documentation and laboratory analysis results by management on a routine basis. Licensee representatives indicated that an audit program was being established between the different B&W facilities such that the health physics organization would be periodically audited by personnel independent of the licensee's health physics organization.
l Method's for Assuring Deficiencies and Deviations in the Program are c.
Recognized, Identified and Corrected.
Performance checks are conducted daily on all counting room instru-mentation. However, there exist no fonnal mechanism for documenting and investigating deficiencies identified by the performance checks.
l
2 The inspector discussed this area with licensee representatives and was infonned that they consider their program to be adequate; the inspector also noted that the licensee has no license requirements for quality control in the arer of radioanalytical measurements.
S.
Procedure and Record Review a.
The inspector reviewed the following procedures and records.
1.
AS-1103, " Airborne Radioactive Materials Control", Rev. 5.
2.
AS-1104, " Contaminated Liquid Effluents", Rev. 5.
3.
HS-63, Gas Proportional Counter Calibration Records,1982.
4.
HS-06, Laboratory' Alpha Counting Instrumentation Performance, 1982.
i 5.
Liquid Effluent. Records,1-4-82 to 9-1-82.
The results of the procedure and record review are discussed in paragraphs 5b-Sc.
b.
The inspector noted that no mechanism existed for demonstrating.preci-sion and accuracy of the licensee's gross alpha analyses. The inspector stated that the performance of duplicate analyses on liquid effluent samples should be done on at least 10 percent of the sample workload. The inspector also stated frequency should be established where the same stack or inplant filter sample is counted on different counters. The results of the different counts can then serve as a measure of comparability for gross alpha counting of particulate filters. The inspector also noted the need for analysis of spiked samples. Licensee representatives indicated that they would consider the reconinendations by the inspector. This area will be reviewed in a subsequentinspection(70-1201/82-14-01).
c.
The inspector noted that the licensee's warning limit for the daily check source of the alpha counters is designated as 3 sigma. The inspector stated that "HASL" and "The EPA Handbook for Analytical Quality Control in Radioanalytical Laboratories" recommends 2 sigma as the warning limit and 3 sigma as an out-of-control limit. Licensee representatives agreed to change the acceptance criteria for the response check of the alpha counters (70-1201/82-14-02).
6.
Confirmatory Measurements l
a.
The inspector collected several inplant air filters and a liquid effluent sample during the inspection. These simples will be analyzed for isotopic uranium by the NRC contract laboratory and the results will be compared with the licensees reported values. The comparison of results will be conveyed to licensee representatives by telephone when available and will be documented in a subsequent inspection report (70-1201/82-14-03).
m.%m e-e.ame ww, m
+=
. -. - -