ML20137D550

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Sanitized Safeguards Insp Rept 70-1113/83-22 on 830806-09. Major Areas Inspected:Physical Inventory,Independent Insp Effort & Followup on Previous Insp Findings
ML20137D550
Person / Time
Site: 07001113
Issue date: 08/31/1983
From: Bates J, Lankford J, Mcalpine E, Richard B, Richards B
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
To:
Shared Package
ML20137D194 List:
References
FOIA-85-554 70-1113-83-22, 70-1113-83-22-0, NUDOCS 8511270094
Download: ML20137D550 (5)
v • d • e


Text

--

, UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISS10.4

['

[p2 r ye cg^%'p,

s. REGION 11

. .; e e ici uwcTT4 sr.n w sont 3 00 o '

! ATtANTA. GEORGIA 30303

S .7;'. . e' ,

AUG 3 01983

~

Report'No. 70-1113/83-22 Docket No. 70-1113 License No. SNM-1097 ,

Safeguards Group No. III Licensee: General Electric Company P. O. Box 780 Wilmington, NC 28402 Date.of Inspection: August. 6-9, 1983 Type of Inspection: Unannounced Material Control and Accountability Inspectors: O[  !  !

T/3/ #.3 J. B. Lart(ford, Safeguards Auditor Date Signed 0 /d- r~ [ $ 3i/E3 -

g W.~ Bates, Senior Safeguards Chemist Da'te Signed B

0..f. R h L. Richards, Statistician s'/ 3.> /n Date Signed Approved by: 8% ' hl.>

E. J. McAlpine, Chief) Material Control and 2/3I/I,3 Date Signed Accountability Section, Safeguards Branch Division of Emergency Preparedness and Materials Safety Programs Inspection Summary Areas Inspected: Physical Inventory, Independent Inspection Effort, and Followup on Previous Inspection Findings.

The inspection involved 54 inspector hours on site by three NRC inspectors and was begun during the regular hours.

-Results: The licensee was found to be in compliance with NRC requirements in the areas examined during the inspection.

l l

8511270094 851119 PDR FOIA RATNER 85-554 PDR l

ae . * *e 3- -,-

. . . . . ~ . ..

. ~ _- _

C:p:: 5 '~/

/ . . .- l

< Y__? ages -

Dis document is not to b= !

, reproducedwithoutspecif;}

. aptroval cf Ir- '--'

~

.. REPORT-0ETAILS Report No. 70-1113/83-22

1. Key Persons Contacted
  • J. E. Bergman, Manager, Fuel Manufacturing
  • D. A. Burns, Acting Manager,. Materials .

"A. G.' . Dada, Acting Manager, Manufacturing Technology and Engineering Operations P. N. Dennison, Specialist, Licensing and Nuclear Materials Management

  • W. J. Hendry, Manager, Regulatory Compliance
  • E. A. Lees, Manager, Quality Assurance G. R. Mallett, Senior Engineer, Measurements and Statistics C. L. Nixon, Technician, Licensing and Nuclear Materials Management "R. C. Pace, Acting Manager, Fuel Chemical Operations
  • R. G. Patterson, Manager, Fuel Fabrication Operations "R. A. Petelinkar, Manager, Planning and Projects
  • C. M. Vaughan, Manager, Licensing and Nuclear Materials Management
  • H. F. Walker, Specialist, Licensing and Nuclear Materials Management The inspectors also interviewed several other licensee employees.
  • Denotes those present at the exit interview
2. Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings (Closed) 82-17-02 (Inspector Follow up Item) Adequateness of enrichment overcheck program to detect SAM-II measurements which fall outside accep-tance criteria. Improvements in the licensee's enrichment overcheck program are discussed in paragraph 3.

(0 pen) 83-17-04 (Inspector Follow-up Item) Review data used to determine quantity of SNM contained in blended uranium dioxide powder containers. The data was obtained from the licensee during the current inspection. The measurement data and the licensee's methods for generating the measurement data are under review by Region II.

3. Physical Inventory The objectives of this inspection were to: (1) review the licensee's procedures for performing a physical inventory, (ii) observe the licensee's operational inventory practices, and (iii) perform independent verification of inventory records.

1

a. Procedure Review The regulatory requirements for the conduct of a physical inventory and the licensee's implementation of the requirements as described in the licensee's physical inventory procedure and FNMC Plan were as follows.

lT Q

  • ~ e-a I 6'  %<- o ee..w e,..pe

..e.wo-

. 2 .

G r

i.

l 4

i l

l I

I i

t 1

f 1

t m

1 9

l l

I

~~****

f.

el_., .*

~ " "

I ~-

4,* *eg a = . ,

  • 4 ss 4.. ,nf 5- ..

e

. . ~i l

1

. 3 i

\,

i i

i i

\

b. Inventory Observation The inspectors accompanied several.of.the licensee's inventory teams to evaluate their compliance with insentory instructions in recording the physical inventory. Computer programs list the inventory by item identification, location, seal identification, and material weights.

Inventory tags are af fixed on each container inventoried. A team member reads the tag number and verification data to the Team Leader and Recorder who check oft the data on the inventory listing. In each of the areas observed the inventory teams appeared to be well organized and were following the inventory instructions. This was indicative of adequate pre-inventory planning and training.

Process hold-up tanks were visually inspected and determined to be empty. P roce s's l i nes , flanges and related process equipment other than process air filters were dismantled and cleaned for inventory. Hold-up uranium factors were assigned to HEPA process air filters and are discussed further herein. One last batch of process rad waste solution from cleanup was collected in the accumulation tank, samples were taken and the volume determined to be 940 liters.

c. Independent Verification Through independent verification the inspectors evaluated the accuracy of the licensee's perpetual inventory records. A sample of items and containers was selected and the identification data from the items was compared to the licensee's perpetual inventory record. Verification parameters included item identification, location, tamperseal number, and gross weight. No discrepancies were noted.

T 5:

. ~ - . . .. .

..w cg.ruc,yy,_gyy, -

,. .- e 4 .

t c

d. SAM-II Err Sment Overcheck Thelicensee'sSIM(StabilizedAssayMeter)h.IIenrichmentovercheck p'ogram r was examined. Containers whose SNM content were verified by SAM-II for inventory preparation were subjected to a five pePtent overcheck by sampling and laboratory percent U-235 analysis. The differences between the laboratory and SAM-II values were analyzed for

' significance (at the 95% confidence level) using a Student's "t" test.

It was determined that no ,significant difference existed between the laboratory and SAM-II technique. During the current inspection it was

- disclosed that the-licensee had recently revised and improved the program for detecting significant differences between the SAM-II overcheck values and the accountability measurement values. The licensee issued a procedure entitled "Tampersafe and Inventory Sealing Cans Before Inventory - 1983" on June 15, 1983 to address this aspect of the program. A review of SAM-II measurement data showed that the licensee was taking appropriate action when differences exceeded the acceptance criteria. It appeared that the licensee had an adequate SAM-II enrichment overcheck program in place.

4. Independent Inspection Effort The ongoing concert of shipper-receiver differences between the licensee and the gaseous diffusion plants was discussed. The licensee indicated that a study would be performed with major emphasis on the tare weight value assigned to recertified cylinders.
5. Exit Inter iew The inspection scope and findings were summarized on August 9,1983 with those persons indicated in Paragraph 1 above.

a 4

9

.z: . . :..

~-.s...

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20137D550&oldid=2834875"