ML20134K244

NRC Observation Audit Rept OA-97-02 of DOE Ofc of Technical Svcs Audit 97VP-WV-AU-01 of West Valley Demonstration Project

ML20134K244
Person / Time
Issue date:	02/11/1997
From:	Spraul J, Tokar M NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS)
To:
Shared Package
ML20134K219	List: ML20134K216 ML20134K244
References
REF-PROJ-M-32 OA-97-02, OA-97-2, NUDOCS 9702130201
Download: ML20134K244 (46)

Text

.

_._._m.

4 i

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OBSERVATION AUDIT REPORT OA-97-02 OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY OFFICE OF TECHNICAL SERVICES 1

AUDIT NUMBER 97VP-WV-AU-01 OF THE WEST VALLEY DEMONSTRATION PROJECT t

4 Prepared by:

02/07/97 hn G. Sphul ank Waste Remediation Section Special Projects Branch Division of Fuel Cycle Safety 1

and Safeguards M

Reviewed and approved by:

02/ N /97,

Michael Tokar, Section keede444#

Tank Waste Remediation Section Special Projects Branch Division of Fuel Cycle Safety and Safeguards 9702130201 970211 PDR PROJ M-32 PDR

l MANAGEMENT

SUMMARY

This U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Environmental Management, Office of Waste Management, Office of Technical Services (EM-37) compliance audit of the quality assurance (QA) program of the West Valley Demonstration Project (WVDP) evaluated the i

adequacy and effectiveness of the WVDP QA program as applied to the WVDP activities related to high-level radioactive waste form production. The audit took place while WVDP personnel were completing the fill of the 69th of some planned 300 canisters with the high-level radioactive waste slurry at the West Valley site:.

Overall, the EM-37 audit team concluded that the high-level radioactive waste form production and associated processes of the WVDP met QA program, reauirements and were acceptable. The NRC staff agrees with this conclusion. One deficiency was noted in that one software program was not identified as " Quality f:'ecting Software" as it should have been.

Based on the observation of this audit, the NRC staff lias determined that EM-37 Audit 97VP-WV-AU-01 was useful and effective and that the QA program for high-level waste form production is being effectively implemented at the WVDP. The audit was organized and conducted in a thorough and professional manner. Audit team members were independent of the activities they audited, they were well qualified in their disciplines, and their assignments and checklist items were adequately described in the audit plan.

= _

l l

1 i

l

1.0 INTRODUCTION

3 A member of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission Division of Fuel Cycle Safety and Safeguards OA staff observed the Department of Energy (DOE), Environmental Management, Office of Waste Management, Office of Technical Services (EM-37) compliance audit of the OA program of the West Valley Demonstration Project (WVDP).

This audit,97VP-WV-AU-01, was conducted on January 27-30, 1997, at the WVDP facilities in West Valley, New York. The audit evaluated the adequacy and effectiveness of the WVDP OA program as applied to the WVDP activities related to high-level radioactive waste form production. DOE's Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management (OCRWM) Office of Quality Assurance had an observer at this audit; the State of Nevada did not.

The principal participants in the WVDP are (1) the DOE West Valley Project Office, responsible for the project, and (2) West Valley Nuclear Services (a subsidiary of Westinghouse Electric Company), the management and operating contractor for the project. The NRC's interest in the WVDP stems primarily from the possibility that the radioactive waste may eventually be stored in an NRC-licensed facility and from the NRC's current involvement in the Hanford tank waste remediation system which may use a vitrification process similar to that being used at West Valley.

The objectives of this audit by EM-37 were to assess the processes and procedures applied by WVDP to high-level waste form production and to determine whether the WVDP OA program and its implementation met the applicable requirements of the OCRWM Quality Assurance Requirements and Description document (OARD: DOE /RW-0333P) and associated WVDP implementing procedures.

The primary objective of the NRC staff was to gain confidence that OCRWM, EM-37, WVDP, and their contractor / subcontractor personnel are properly implementing the requirements of their organizations' OA programs in accordance with the OCRWM OARD and Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), Part 70 - Subpart 70.22(f), and Part 60 - Subpart G. (Both subparts reference Appendix B of 10 CFR Part 50). A second objective of the NRC staff was to become familiar with the WVDP processes and procedures for vitrification of high-level radioactive waste and its associated QA program.

This report addresses the effectiveness of the EM-37 audit and the adequacy of implementation of WVDP QA controls for its activities related to high-level radioactive waste form production.

2.0 AUDIT PARTICIPANTS 2.1 NRC John G. Spraul Observer 2.2 DOE Jim Conway Audit Team Leader (ATL)

EM-37 Bryan Bower Auditor WVDP Jim Flaherty Technical Specialist BDM/ Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC)

Kriss Grisham Auditor EM-32 Bob Hartstern Auditor MACTEC Dick Lynch Auditor Savannah River Ed Martinez Auditor WVDP Andria Mellon Technical Specialist New York Energy Research and Development Authority Norm Moreau Auditor MACTEC Jim George Observer OCRWM Office of Quality Assurance /Ouality Assurance Technical Support Services /CER 3.0 REVIEW OF THE AUDIT AND AUDITED ORGANIZATION 3.1 Auditing Procedures This audit of the WVDP was conducted in accordance with EM-37's Standard Practice Procedure (SPP-) 4.02," Administration and Conduct of Quality Assurance Audits," and SPP-5.01," Deviations and Corrective Actions."

The NRC staff observation of this audit was based on the procedure, " Conduct of Observation Audits," issued by NRC's Division of High-Level Waste Management on October 6,1989.

3.2 Scope of Audit The audit plan identified this as an audit to examine the adequacy and effectiveness of implementation of the WVDP QA program and procedures as applied to the waste acceptance activities associated with high-level radioactive waste form production at WVDP.

The potentially applicable QA programmatic elements (from the QARD and listed below) were audited during this audit. The audit team ascertained whether the OA program elements met the requirements imposed by DOE and commitments made by WVDP. This was done by determining, for these elements, the adequacy of the WVDP QA program, its implementation, and its effectiveness as well as verifying compliance with requirements as regards to the process for vitrification of high-level radioactive waste.

Reference Proarammatic Element 1.0 Organization 2.0 Quality Assurance Program 3.0 Design Control 4.0 Procurement Document Control 5.0 Implementing Documents 6.0 Document Control 7.0 Control of Purchased items and Services 8.0 identification and Control of items 9.0 Control of Special Processes

i I

, l 10.0 Inspection l

11.0 Test Control 12.0 Control of Measuring and Test Equipment l

13.0 Handling, Storage, and Shipping 14.0 Inspection, Test, and Operating Status 15.0 Nonconformances l

16.0 Corrective Action 17.0 QA Records 18.0 Audits Supplement i Software Supplement il Sample Control Supplement ill Scientific investigations Appendix A High-Level Waste Form Production (The checklist for Design Control addressed Appendix A as well.)

The NRC staff found this approach to be acceptable in light of the fact that EM-37 had previously performed performance-based audits to verify product quality.

3.3 Conduct of Audit The EM-37 audit team had prepared an 81 page checklist prior to the audit. The checklist was used by the ATL and auditors as they performed their interviews, reviewed pertinent documents, and made the QA evaluations.

The EM-37 audit team and the observers caucused at the end of each day's audit. The ATL did not hold formal daily meetings with WVDP management to discuss the then-current audit status and preliminary findings of the audit team. Rather, the audit team maintained a " status board" readily available to interested WVDP personnel and discussed potential problems with WVDP personnel when such problems surfaced. This method of keeping WVDP management informed of the audit status was effective during this audit.

The audit was performed in a professional manner. The members of the audit team were well prepared and demonstrated a sound knowledge of their assigned audit areas.

i 3.4 Timing of Audit In lieu of an audit of WVDP in 1996, EM-37 had conducted a surveillance in May of 1996 and participated in the " Readiness Validation" during the Spring of 1996. The " Readiness Validation" investigated personnel qualification and training, whether the QA program for operations was in place, and whether the other prerequisites for start-up given in the Waste Qualification Report had been met.

The audit took place while WVDP personnel were completing the fill of the 69th of some planned 300 canisters with the high-level radioactive waste slurry at the West Valley site.

The audit was timely.

i 4

3.5 Examination of Audited Areas Appropriate WVDP personnel and documents were made available to the audit team during the audit. The WVDP personnel were questioned by audit team members as they reviewed the objective evidence. The interview method of auditing, conducted simultaneously with the checking of objective evidence, was effective.

Audit team members received thorough responses to the checklist questions. The

(,hecklist contained questions regarding the programmatic elements listed in Section 3.2, above. The auditors posed numerous questions beyond the checklist during the audit as necessary to investigate further into the QA program and its implementation. This probing by the auditors indicated that they were familiar with the subject matter and were well prepared for the audit. Pertinent documents were reviewed to verify audit results. The audit team findings are presented in Section 3.8 of this report.

The audit team performed an acceptable audit.

3.6 Audit Team Qualifications and independence The qualifications of the ATL and auditor were found to be acceptable in that each met the requirements of SPP-3.03," Qualification and Certification Requirements for Audit Personnel."

The audit team members did not have prior responsibility for performing the activities they audited. Two of the auditors on the audit team are WVDP employees who were familiar with the activities audited. However, they had no responsibility or involvement for the activities they audited. During the audit, the nature and depth of the objectivity of the questions substantiated the independence of these auditors. The audit team members had sufficient independence to carry out their assigned functions without adverse pressure or influence. The audit team was qualified in the QA discipline, and the assignments and checklist items were adequately described in the audit plan.

3.7 Review of Previous DOE Audit Findings Earlier audits and surveillances of WVDP conducted by DOE had identified deficiencies.

The corrective actions for these deficiencies were generally verified previously by DOE, but one had not been verified at the time of this audit. Therefore, this audit reviewed the status of this deficiency and determined that it could not be closed. This is shown as the fifth concern listed in Section 3.8, below, as presented by the ATL at the post-audit meeting with WVDP management.

3.8 EM-37 Audit Team Findings The EM-37 audit team's overall finding was that WVDP's QA performance was satisfactory. Specific findings reported by the audit team at the post-audit meeting are shown below.

Deficiency: The RS/1 software program was not identified as " Quality Effecting Software" as it should have been.

Concerns:

o Matrices in WVDP-074 and WVDP-212 need to be updated.

e WVDP needs to evaluate making Development Vitrification Procedure 63-57 an SOP.

e Two Analytical Chemistry Procedures (4.1 and 9.1) and one Program Requirements Document (9.0) need to be updated / revised.

• The Priority Assessment Matrix needs to address the QARD basis of product quality.

• Deviation and Corrective Action Report 96VP-WV-S-01-D01 needs to be closed.

• The Analytical and Process Chemistry conditional data release process for slurry samples and glass shard samples needs to be reviewed and evaluated.

e Sample inputs to the SPECIES RANGE program need to be clearly identified.

• Sample outliers in PCT CHECK program need to be identified.

e Software test cases need to be periodically rerun.

• Sample identification field in SAMPSTAT program output needs to show actual sample numbers.

• Comments on Production Records made April 16,1996, need to be dispositioned.

Positive Findings:

• Analytical and Process Chemistry plans to begin trending the conditional data release process as part of its independent internal assessment program.

e Appendix F of SOP 63-28 has been by Field Change 1 to Revision 3 to identify the slurry batch glass yield.

3.9 NRC Staff Findings The WVDP process for vitrification of high-level radioactive waste appears to be conducted in an effective and well documented manner. The processes and procedures are subjected to a review process by WVDP which appears to be effective in eliminating errors. The EM-37 audit team's overall finding was that WVDP's OA performance was satisfactory. NRC staff agrees with this finding.

The audit was conducted in a professional manner, and the audit team adequately evaluated activities and objective evidence. The audit was effective in determining the adequacy and degree of implementation of the WVDP QA program as applied to high-level waste form production.

1 The initial checklist questions provided an adequate basis to conduct a thorough audit of the WVDP QA program for vitrification of high-level radioactive waste. The auditors went into sufficient detail during the audit to examine the QA activities related to the WVDP process for vitrification of high-level radioactive waste performed by WVDP. Based on the discussions, it appeared that the WVDP personnel audited were knowledgeable in their i

respective fields. The method used by the audit team to perform the audit was an L

appropriate combination of discussions with the involved WVDP personnel, review of the data sources and production records, and reviews of project files and other reference material requested by the audit team and provide.d by WVDP. Previously recognized good auditing practices were followed by the ATL and the audit team, and the NRC staff did not observe any deficiencies in the audit process.

1 l

M If I

1 1

1 l

1 i

ATTACHMENT 2 4

1 INTRODUCTION AND l

OVERVIEW i

i I

i i

i J

1 i

Y

I i

Continuing on the Total Quality Journey 1

l The West Valley Demonstration Project Team has been on the Total 1

Quality Journeyfor almost 15 years. The centralfocusfor Project l

partners has been to work closely with customers and theperformance is the pinnacle ofour Total Qualitypyramid and ultimate metric ofsuccess.

Alignment with the customers' strategic objectives and internalgoals include employee performance objectives as a cornerstone affocus and communication thatfacilitates meeting customer requirements.

l l

E Safety: Proactively Caring for I

People and the Environment i

l j

N People: Valuing and Recognizing l

Employees

)

m Performance: Delivering Key l

Objectives N Transformation: Continuing to Refine the Value Chain 1

I

_ = _ _ _ _ -

I I

Continuing on the Total Quality Journey l

The West Valley Demonstration Project Team has been on the Total i

Quality Journeyfor abnost 15 years. The centralfocusfor Project partners has been to work closely with customers and the performance is

\\

the pinnacle ofour Total Qualitypyramid and ultimate metric ofsuccess.

l Mignment with the customers' strategic objectives and internalgoals j

include employee performance objectives as a cornerstone offocus and l

communication thatfacilitates l,

meeting customer requirements.

l 5 Safety: Proactively Caring for i

People and the Environment j

{

M People: Valuing and Recognizing I

Employees a Performance: Delivering Key Objectives

[..

a Transformation: Continuing to i

Refme the Value Chain

._____.___..._m t

West Valley Demonstration Project t

i 1

i pd1-9-97 3940jjv

i West Valley Demonstration Project l

l l

l i

I f

ildI-9-97 3

3940ily

i I

i I

i i

m

st j

y

?a

l ATTACHMENT 3 VITRIFICATION PROCESS AND STATUS I

Vitrification Process and Status I

4

- #'i

\\

- /

ausf k-

[$ r. [ M - kk

'gS e

~

?

-=

f

~

i

+

i i

Paul J. Valenti i

e Manager Vitrification Operations

7 1t -

4

,n..-

West Valley Demonstration Project Overview Project History 1962 Nuclear Fuel Services reached agreement with the Atomic Energy i

Commission and New York State to n-construct the first commercial nuclear

[

1 i

fuel reprocessing plant in the United 6

States.

{

G 1966-1972 During operation, approximately 640 metric tons of spent nuclear fuel were reprocessed to recover usable uranium g

l and plutonium.

.l 1972-1976 Reprocessing plant shut down for modifications to increase capacity.

Nuclear Fuel Services withdrew from the reprocessing business and retumed the site to New York State.

l r

1980-1981 U.S. Congress passed the West Valley t

i Demonstration Project Act. West Valley Nuclear Services Company was selected j

as the Management & Operating 1

Contractor.

j 1

akj1/97 3944piv

i i

West Valley Demonstration Project Overview i

Project History 1982 DOE and West Valley Nuclear Services Company assumed operational control of the site. New York State retained

,\\,

j ownership of the site.

dI l

9S L-ComJe.

4 g

/

q'e

%chwartz Ropd 1

13 o u+s g

=

I

[

i

• * "1 O

qff Qd n

WVDP

\\

/

\\

g 9-EAOC

{

\\.9 b

WNYNSC

,i Boundary line e/

=

goy r

To West Valldb

~

~~

t -

I West Valley Demonstration Project Overview i

The West Valley Demonstration Project Act OBJECTIVE

. Demonstrate Solidification and Preparation of High-Level Waste for Permanent Disposal AUTHORITY

= Public Law 96-368, West Valley Demonstration Project Act I

SCOPE

. Develop Containers

. Solidify Liquid High-Level Wastes

. Decontaminate and Decommission Facilities Used

. Transport to Federal Repository

. Dispose of Low-Level and Transuranic Wastes l

,b.1 so 7 3944niv

l West Valley Demonstration Project Overview i

1

~

Low-level Waste l;

l Nuclear Waste Cement Fi!!ed Drums Management Challenge l

'f Yle,

\\

,i

(

15

~

I I

O g W, 9 '

Glass Filled I

h Canisters

.g tt ed H

t Tank 8D-2 9

1 5..

il 660,000 Gallons

)

,a-.

l u

West Valley Demonstration Project Overview 1,

Project History j

1988 Construction was completed on the IRTS. System placed in operation with decontamination performance significantly better than design j

requirement.

I t

l 1989 Five years of nonradioactive testing of l

the glass-making system was completed. This demonstrated the ability to produce glass that meets DOE requirements.

k l

i i

1 l

l

' - Ir meme nk s 1147 nn a n ~.

l West Valley Demonstration Project Overview i

l Process Overview l

L L

Low-level Waste Processing Cycle i

Supematant Cement h Cen l

Treatment Lqud Waste Sohdificaten f

i

/

Treatment Zeokte e [

h, Transportaten 8D-2 3J

n Vdulicaton Intenm Storage ] Termnat Waste i High-level Waste Processing Cycle 8' S' l F q t - 70.t a niv I West Valley Demonstration Project Overview Supernatant Treatment System l 4 t Sgemssant ,,ceaser, II. I. d ' Cesium Removal Catumns rm Feet Send FEter Sgemetent m C409 C482 C463 C404 Q f%,f uner _ ~i onco -

tWTS D401 ank 80-2 Vest D Me Tank 00-3 l

Tert 80 t [ Tank BD-2 F l .r., 1I il l iI i!! f lII!flll iip; y t -(1 i l 1 ic a F d e d l e m i h S e ,g-t d s s ny. 2_ uS ol w r a e G v i e v ei r r vt e oe v O bR A t e e c ed e uo jo qC i r nr P U a -e n B F n o y i i d s ta a r erE t s oh n t t o Si m sw e m D u r ye D l t la n V em t s e W e C i 1

l 1

.'I I l1 i ' i,; West Valley Demonstration Project Overview HLW Pretreatment Chronology Gallons Start Finish l Processed PUREX Supernalant Processing 618,000 May '88 Nov '90 Sludge Wash #1 and Processing 410,000 Oct '91 May '94 Sludge Wash #2 and Processing 356,000 May '94 Aug '94 THOREX Neutralization 13,000 Dec '94 Jan '95 PUREX/THOREX Wash and Processing 316,000 Jan '95 May '95 Zeolite Mobilization, Transfer and 58,200 kg Jul '95 Jan '96 Size Reduction kr- West Valley Demonstration Project Overview Process Overview Low-leve! Waste Processing Cycle e-t Senatant Cement Drum CeH i Tmatment O Lequed Waste Soldficate Treatment i Zeohte N BD-2 (Pendeg EIS) l %9 I i. Sludge /Zeohte Mobiltration i l P Vitnficaten interrn Storage i a i Terminal Waste High-level Waste Processing Cycle stora9e 4 l it - l Vitrification Process and Status 1 i Vitrification Testing and Startup History i l Dec '89 Completed Full-Scale Test Operations; l Commenced Conversion to Radioactive Facility i l Mar '93 Met Permit-to-Construct Requirements l Sep '94 Completed Vitrification Facility ' % * = m ili a., Construction i Apr '95 Completed Shielding Analysis Verification Report g l May '95 Completed Cold Chemical Facility l Testing [ j May '95 Received NESHAPS Permit for ~ Air Emissions Jun '95 Completed NOx Facility Construction i kl _,,l ,e.,m l 1 Vitrification Process and Status l Vitrification Testing and Startup History 1 j Jul '95 Powered Production Melter Oct '95 Commenced Integrated h; ' fp 1 Nonradioactive Testing .,I'

'^

L Apr '96 Received DOE Release for eS7 Radioactive Tie-Ins  : If -

• jl y}.

May '96 Completed New York State f J NOx Protocols Testing May '96 WVNS ORR Declaration of l i Readiness m Jun '96 Completed DOE ORR and ~ ^' ~ Received Authorization F to Proceed i Jul '96 Completed First Radioactive f Canistdr l L Vitrification Process and Status HLW Processing Flow Sheet Cold Chemical Facility i Glass Formers l l i i O i lon Exchanger i A to Remove Cs Metter i CSS i(- Feed 8 l ___y g_ _ _______I Concentrator Hold l j l,' Feed Tank i I i t Make-Up (MFHT) i i Feed Delivery e.i.,4n n r s, i i I i Tank q j 7 l ll!.l!'l! l 1 8 (CFMT) System a i 4 I submerged UVVV . :N / i Zeolite Storage ii Bed g Q l 60-1 I i 1 r Scrubber i i CESIUM Wa-te 'l 1------- l l l. A l eI l 1I l 1 8 I ll Metter [ i i Ex-cell l System ' 0%as I i 1f1 I Sludge ll l Canister C 3: /N i l i uu-Z I ' Canister g Closure i 01-14 c 8D-4 PUREX Waste li l Storage Inspection l Building I j THOREX ei t l Waste 8 i High-level Transfer i i Waste Intenm Tunnel i ei Storage ___________2 t____________________________, I Waste Tank Vitrification Facility l Farm t - 1 gh3jf()) OON i l E I' .(3 m iF 1 9 i C ~ } <a M 3 E m e 'g >= 5 N a O E .w w O O e 3 == E e s A 5 i E a 4 m E E b = 99 m e a 6 E E / = = e i s D e a f I N \\ t en m bh u)O.E o ii UU-5 ae 5 .0hb = me iib e i Vitrification Process and Status WVNS Vitrification Process Cycle = HLW Transfer to CFMT, Agitate CFMT = 24 HLW Samples Taken from CFMT, Samples Transferred to A&PC Lab = Commence Concentration of Waste in CFMT -Glass Former Preparation in Cold Chemical Facility - Analysis, Concentration, and Recipe Complete = Glass Formers Transferred to CFMT = After Agitating,14 Samples Taken from the CFMT and Transferred to A&PC Lab = After Verification of the CFMT Samples, Sugar Added for Redox Control = 14 Additional CFMT Samples for information Only h f r I akl1/97 3944pjv l Vitrification Process and Status WVNS Vitrification Process Cycle t = Transfer CFMT to the MFHT = MFHT Continuously Fed to Melter = Melter Fills Canisters Using a Series of " Airlifts" = After Fill, Canisters are Rotated in the Turntable = Canisters Transferred to Weld Station -Shard Sampling -Fill Height Measurement -Lid Welding j = Canister then Moved to the Decon Station = Canister Moved from Decon Station to Storage Rack then to HLW Interim i Storage Using the VF Canister Transfer Cart i i L l ua n _.s s a mu s.*Asnwa-o-----2+- .um -a -e---A ma o -x ~~-*=s-A -r=== auk +sa*, * ~ = ** ' " - ' + " =, - - - ' " " - * * - ~ "

• "m--

i i \\* i W e 'E ch \\ ll la 3 i i \\ 1 \\ $*J s $I

c. 2

\\ Y\\ [ I ? i a 3 i e 1 3 i \\ l l / i e I$ $ i 3-e i!! m .a. ,1 i a .2 = a 5 e. a e M 4 ss' m 5 a O 1 n. g i C \\ 3 k N \\ i

t:

i .Jl3 i ~ i i. i Vitrification Process and Status t West Valley ALARA Performance t Annual Goal Performance Skin Clothing Man-Rem Man-Rem Contaminations Contaminations 1990 21.5 15.3 6 17 1991 17.7 14.5 0 21 1992 18.2 14.9 5 15 1 1993 18.5 13.0 0 2 1 1994 18.0 16.9 0 1 1995 22.0 21.8 2 3 1996 22.1 9.5 1 2 Note: In 1996, Operation of the Vitrification Facility Resulted in.047 Man-Rem Performance and 1 Clothing (Shoe) Contamination l 1 -, t...,o + i Vitrification Process and Status Vitrification Operations Current Status = First HLW Transfer Commenced June 24,1996 1 = First Glass Pour Started July 2,1996 -68 Canisters Filled -65 Shard Sampled, Welded, Deconned -64 Canisters in Storage l = Canister Contact Dose Rate is Approximately -- 2700 R/hr -Fill Height Approximately 90 to 92% i i = 21 HLW Transfers from Tank Farm to Vitrification Facility -Over 2.69 Million Curies of Cs-137 and Sr-90 Transferred g-ak 1/97 3944pjv 3 l ATTACHMENT 4 QUALITY ASSURANCE SUPPORT AND OVERSIGHT l l l \\ HLW QA Program Audit fI January 27-31,1997 h i I Quanty Assurance Support & Oversight ofthe j i Vitnyication Process i l i Jack Hummel QA Manager l t QA/ DES 1084 VW h Vit Support & Oversight i 2 QA Support Team L Operations (Full Time) 4 Quality Engineers 4 Inspectors Procurement (Part Time) 2 Quality Engineers QA/ DES 10MVW 7 Vit Support & Oversight Procurement Program Canister - Fab Shop (ABW) WVNS Resident Inspection - On-Site Receipt Inspection - Canister Load In Inspection f - Quarterly Surveillance - Annual Audit of ABW Glass Making (Cold) Chemicals - Local (Buffalo) Storage for JIT - Receiving Inspection for ID & Documentation - Quarterly Surveillance / Annual Audit as Necessary l QA/ DES 10M.VW [ac Vit Support & Oversight [ Hold Points Program l Feed Batch Data Package Reviews - Before CFMT to MHT Transfer - Species Range - PCT Check l Canister Load In l Welding of Canister Lid - Fill Height Measurement - Shard Sampling - Welding Parameter Checks and Inspection QM)ESIO84.VW Vit Support & Oversight ,[ 2 Process Surveillance Program I Surveillance Plans Contain Activities Important to WQR Items and Process Attributes l I Focused Review Based on HLW Items and Activities List Every item has been reviewed at least once since the start of Vit. Campaign All Process Travelers for Feed and CWF Data Package are reviewed Production Records are 100% reviewed Temperature Monitoring of Canister Storage Facility is being reviewed QA/ DES 1084.VW i Vit Support & Oversight i ~ c i Audit Program INTERNAL (1996) Vit Operations Vit Test Control Analytical and Process Chemistry Laboratory Training Program Records Management QA/ DES 10M.VW I f Vit Support & Oversight c ~ H Audit Program l 1 EXTERNAL (199f1) Cold Chemical Vendor (Noah Technologies) 1 Canister Fabricator (American Boiler Works) l Minor Modification to Grapple (Bartholomew) l i i QNDES1084.VW Vit Support & Oversight q L QA Program Improvement Initiatives i PAM A system of quantifying issues for determining the significance and risks. l SIMS An improved process of managing significant issues for reducing cycle time, raising the level of significance and electronically managing issue forms. { i A streamlined process of key quality reviews in functional IOP programs to reduce risk profiles. l QA/ DES 1084.VW i e Vit Support & Oversight c 2 l Summary Appropriate levels of support and oversight are being provided. i HLW QA Program is continually being implemented. l h i 5 i l I i i i I i } u i ATTACHMENT 5 l WVDP - FERNALD COMPARISON WVDP Fernald Melter Single Chamber Three Chamber Operating Temp 1150 1350 Penetrations Top / side Bottom / side Electrodes Inconel Molybdenum Penetrations inconel Molydisilicide Composition Fe 12% Fe 4% Oxides Pb 0% Pb 4% S 0.2% S 2% Ca 0.5% Ca 7% REDOX IFO Model NO Conditiosn Moderately Oxidizing Experience 5 years of FACTS Mini-Melter at CUA 3 Minimelters Cold Ops .