ML20150B137

Insp Rept 70-1201/88-02 on 880210-12.No Violations or Deviations Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Liquid & Gaseous Radwaste Mgt & Environ Monitoring

ML20150B137
Person / Time
Site:	07001201
Issue date:	03/02/1988
From:	Kahle J, Marston R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
To:
Shared Package
ML20150B132	List: ML20150B130 ML20150B137
References
70-1201-88-02, 70-1201-88-2, NUDOCS 8803160190
Download: ML20150B137 (8)

Text

. _ _ ____- .

' @ **c0 t c' 4 UNITED STATES jo,

., j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION ll C 101 MARIETTA ST., N.W.

g ,,,,, ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30323 MAR 0 21988 Report No.: 70-1201/88-02 Licensee: B&W Fuel Company l Comercial Nuclear Fuel Plant  !

Lynchburg, VA 24505 .

Docket No.: 70-1201 License No.: SNM-1168 .

Facility Name: Comercial Nuclear Fuel Plant Inspection Conducted: February 10-12.,1988 Inspector: M R. R. Marston N Date Signed Accompanying Personnel: C. Hughey D. Sly, ONMSS W. Pennington, ONMSS R. Provene er, ONMSS Approved by: _f .

J. B Kahle, Section Chief 3/M Date Signed Divi ion of Radiation Safety and Safeguards

SUMMARY

Scope: This routine, unannounced inspection was conducted in the areas of  ;

liquid and gaseous radioactive waste management and environmental monitoring, i Results: No violations or deviations were identified.

l i

i 8803160190 880302 DR ADOCK0700g21

6 REPORT DETAILS

1. Persons Contacted Licensee Employees

• R. Alto, CNFP Plant Manager

• W. Engelke, Manager, Quality and Safety  :

• K. Shy, Health Physicist

• C, Speight,-Manager, Facilities and Services  :

• J. Watters, License and Control Administrator

• Attended exit interview

2. Exit Interview The inspection scope and findings were summarized on February 12, 1988, i with those persons indicated in Paragraph 1 above. The inspector described the areas inspected and discussed in detail the inspection findings listed below. No dissenting comments were received from the ,

licensee. The licensee did not identify as proprietary any of the '

material provided to or reviewed by the inspector during this inspection.

3. Licensee Action on Previous Enforcement Matters This subject was not addressed in the inspection.

4. General At the time of this inspection no fuel was being manufactured. The facility had recently completed the disassembly and pellet recovery of fuel assemblies from a cancelled nuclear power plant.  ;

As of December 4, 1987, the name of the Commercial Nuclear Fuels Division was changed to B&W (initials only) Fuel Company. Fifty-one percent of the i new company was owned by Babcock and Wilcox and forty-nine percent owned by Virginia Fuels, Inc., a French consortium consisting of Cogema.

Framatome and Uranium Pechiney, No organizational changes within the ,

plant occurred as a result of this purchase, i

5. Audits (88035,88045)

Section V,6.6 of the license application Audits, requires that an internal audit program shall be maintained to provide assurance that plant l activities are conducted safely and in accordance with license I specification. The inspectors reviewed the following specific audit I requirements.

r 2

a. . ' Health-Safety personnel shall conduct, at least-weekly, a fonal audit of . plant status relative to nuclear and radiological safety, except during plant shutdowns of a week or longer.

The inspector reviewed the -weekly safety audits for -the -period August 14, 1987, through December 22, 1987. Audits were completed in a timely manner and deficiencies noted were of minor industrial safety, housekeeping and radiation protection nature and were promptly corrected,

b. Independent auditors-shall conduct inspections as follows:

Nuclear Safety - quarterly Health Physics - quarterly The inspector reviewed the quarterly Health physics audits for the third and fourth quarters of 1987 (Audit Nos. HS-87-3 and HS-87-4).

These audits were conducted by an independent health physics auditor from the Naval Nuclear Fuel Division. These audits included, but were not limited to, the review of liquid and gaseous . effluents, environmental monitoring, bioassay results, radiation / contamination surveys, and exposure records. The inspector also reviewed the licensee's response to HS-87-3 and noted that all items of concern.

identified in the audit were promptly addressed. At the time of the inspection, the licensee had not responded to HS-87-4 (dated February 2,1988).

c. An annual ALARA report shall be submitted to the Safety Review Board on employee exposures and effluent release data.

The inspector reviewed the annual ALARA report for the period October 1, 1986, through September 30, 1987, and noted no items of concern.

No violations or deviations were identified.

6. RecordsandReports(88035,88045)

Section V.1.6 of the license application, Records and Reports, requires records and reports pertaining to Health-Safety activities requiring formal documentation to be maintained and stored in accordance with Regulatory Guide 8.7, Occupational Radiation Exposure Records Systems:

The inspector reviewed the following records:

a. Counting instrumentation calibrations, efficiency checks, background checks and control charts for the period August 1987 through December 1987.

These instruments consisted of a solid scintillator and gas flow proportional counters. A selective review of records indicated stable and reliable instrument perfomance.

O-4 3

i

b. Environmental sample collection and analysis records for tne third  !

and fourth quarters of 1987 (as required by Section V.8.1.4 of the i license application, and further described in Health-Safety Procedure ,

No. AS-1127, Rev.10. Environmental Monitoring).

(1) A review of the third quarter 1987 environmental TLD analyses (by Teledyne) indicated all four stations were less than 5 millirem each for the quarter. ,

(2) A review of surface water sample results for the third and fourth quarters 1987 indicated all sample results were less than the 54 picoeuries per liter evaluation level for long term analysis.

(3) A review of vegetation and sediment sample results for the third '

and fourth quarters 1987 indicated all sample results were less than the 20 picoeuries per gram evaluation level for long term analysis. ,

(4) A review of the monthly environmental _ air particulate sample results for the period June'1987 through December 1987 noted no significant activity above background. Although the license  ;

only requires a sample to be collected once a month at each sample station and although the license requirements were met, 3 this sampling practice was not . indicative of representative sampling methods. Under the present sampling practices, airborne particulate activity excursions could only be detected >

during the short time period that the sample pump is operating.  ;

c. Gaseous Effluent Air Sampling and Velocity for September 28, 1987,  !

and December 23, 1987 (flow calibration).  ;

A records review indicated no problem areas.

d. Weekly Manometer /Magnahelic Audit Records (HEPA filter pressure l differential) for August 4, 1987, through December 21, 1987.

• A selective review indicated no results outside of the required action levels. j

e. HEPA Filter 00P Testing - October 22, 1987  !

(1 Controlled Area Effluent Stack i (2 ECHO 330 Bldg. Stack  ;

(3 Fuel Cladding End Conditioning Machine  ;

(4) PLR Recirculation Systems l

Annual testing records of the above filter systems indicated all i exceeded license requirements of greater than or equal to 99.90% l system efficiency and all were less than or equal to 4 inches of I water differential pressure. l l

J l

l 4  !

f. Liquid Release Reports for the period August 1,1987, through December 31, 1987.

The inspector noted that there were a total of sixty batch liquid  ;

releases during the period. _The releases averaged about:

- 920 gallons each-release

- 1% of MPC each release

- 11,000 gallons per month

- 5.14 E+1 microcuries total U activity during the period

- 28 grams total Uranium during the period No sludge accumulation had been noted after any of the releases, j

g. Quarterly Gaseous Effluent Reports for third and fourth quarters 1987.

The inspector noted that the gross alpha activity released per quarter was less than 10 microcuries, the license required reporting ,

1 ~ el .  ;

h. Semi-Annual Gaseous and Liquid Effluent Report (July 1987 through December 1987). l The inspector reviewed the report which is required by 10 CFR 70.59 and noted no items of concern.

No violations or deviations were identified.

7. Liquid and Gaseous Effluent Program (88035)

The inspector examined the facilities and equipment used for the ,

determination of radioactivity in airborne and liquid effluents. This included a general plant tour with a licensee representative, specifically ;

observing the counting laboratory, sampling stations and liquid effluent control tanks.

All areas were clean and neat, and all counting room instruments were i tagged with current calibration dates. The inspector was told that the r plant health physicist had three technicians to assist him in his program. l l

Based on discussions with the licensee representatives, observations and ,

review of the pertinent records specified in Paragraph 6 of this report, '

the licensee's program was conducted in accordance with the license and applicable NRC regulations.

No violations or deviations were identified.

1 I

5

8. Environmental Monitoring (88045)

The inspector examined the facilities and equipment used in the environmental monitoring program. This included a general tour of areas outside the plant with a licensee rcNi.nantative, specifically observing selected air sampling and TLD stations.

Based on discussions with licensee representatives, observations and review of the pertinent records specified in Paragraph 6 of this report, the licensee's program was conducted in accordance with the license and applicable NRC regulations.

No violations or deviations were identified.

9. Piocedures(88035,88045)

Section V.6.5 of the license application, Procedure Control, requires the licensee to establish, maintain and implement written procedures for the conduct of specific operations, including maintenance and development of work within the plant, nuclear and radiological safety, and quality control. The inspector selectively examined procedures pertaining to environmental monitoring and liquid / gaseous effluents. The precedures are listed in Attachment 1.

No violations or deviations were identified.

10. Contaminated "Wet Weather" Stream CNFP (Now B&W Fuel Co.) has released liquid effluent containing trace amounts of uranium since 1969. These were batch releases from retention tanks that were sampled and analyzed for radioactivity prior to discharge.

The retention tanks were discharged to an outfall at a "wet weather" stream just northeast of the plant. This stream empties to the James River about 1,100 feet away.

Even though the individual releases were within regulatory and license requirements, the regular deposit of small amounts of insoluble Uranium 0xide over the years has resulted in detectable levels of Uranium at the outfall and in the adjacent water spread areas. This was confirmed by the licensee in late 1981.

This deposition can be attributed to Uranium Oxide (00 )7 powder processing into pellets (pelletizing). These operations were begun in the sumer of 1975. Because of increases in Uranium activity levels in discharges, an ultra-filtration syster.; was installed in June 1979. This system was replaced by a more efficient polymer flocculation process in late 1980.

This process considerably lowered the amount of Uranium discharged from the plant. Pelletizing operations ceased completely in May 1983.

License Condition No. 22, dated June 29, 1983, required the licensee to evaluate the mechanism / extent of the Uranium contamination and to 1

0 6

recommend remedial action, the results which were reported to the Commission (Uranium contamination of Wet Weather Stream From CNFP Liquid Effluent Discharge, November 1, 1984).

Surface soil samples taken from the affected areas indicated levels in excess of 30 picocuries per gram. Subsurface soil and vegetation samples indicated no spread below the surface and no detectable vegetation uptake.

As a result of the investigation the licensee (1) established a monitoring program which included quarterly surface soil sampling along the northern border of the contaminated stream and (2) fenced and posted the contaminated area to prevent inadvertent unauthorized entry.

A comparison of the third and fourth quarter 1987 soil sample results for gross alpha activity from the "wet weather" stream area to similar sample results back to the fourth quarter of 1984 indicated a general decrease in gross alpha activity levels. Fourth quarter 1984 results (10 sample points) indicated an average of about 26 picocuries per gram gross alpha activity with four samples greater than or equal to 30 picocuries per gram. Fourth quarter 1987 results indicated an average of about 12 picoeuries per gram with only one sample greater than or equal to 30 picocuries per gram. Major flooding of the area since 1984 may have contributed to the reduction.

No violations or deviations were identified.

l l

l 1

i

o ATTACHMENT i Procedures Reviewed by the Inspector AS-1103, Airborne Radioactive Materials Control, Rev.11, November 11, 1987 AS-1104, Contaminated Liquid Effluent Control, Rev. 11, July 17, 1987 l

• AS-1125, Health and Safety Audits, Rev. 7, February 20, 1987 AS-1127. Environmental Monitoring, Rev. 10, July 24, 1986 AS-1129, Calibration and Maintenance of Radiation Survey Instruments.

Rev. 1. February 14, 1986.

1 i

r i

J J

)

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __