ML20238A401
| ML20238A401 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 07001100 |
| Issue date: | 08/20/1987 |
| From: | Della Ratta A, Keimig R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20238A335 | List: |
| References | |
| 70-1100-87-04, 70-1100-87-4, NUDOCS 8709090278 | |
| Download: ML20238A401 (5) | |
Text
-__
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION I Report No.
70-1100/87-04 Docket No.
70-1100 License No.
SNM-1067 Safeguards Group III Licensee:
Combustion Engineering, Inc.
P.O. Box 500 Windsor, Connecticut 06095 Facility Name:
Combustion Engineering - Nuclear Fuel Manufacturing Inspection At: Windsor, Connecticut Inspection Conducted: June 23-26, 1987 Type of Inspection:
Routine, Unannounced Material Control and Accounting Inspector:
d Aco 17 A. Della R~atta,'Shfeguards Auditor date
/
3 7,. f.
/,7 U [ e-< m u p-8'lo A 7 Approved by:
j R. R. Keimig, Chiefs S uards Section, DRSS date Inspection Summary:
Inspection on_ June 23-26, 1987 (Inspection Report No.
70-1100/87-04)
Areas Inspected:
Nuclear material control and accounting, including:
facility operations and internal control, and physical inventory.
Results: One violation was identified:
failure to provide written instruc-tions to personnel that were sufficient for the verification of inventory data as required by 10 CFR 70.51(f)(4)(v)(paragraph 3).
G709090278 870903 PDR ADOCK 07001100 g
L*
l DETAILS 1.
Key Persons Contacted
- R. Sheeran, Manager, Licensing, Safety, Security and Accountability
- D. Parks, Manager, Nuclear Materials G. Kerstnen, Manager of Production J. Voll aro, Supervisor Health Physics and Safety K. Butents, Nuclear Materials Accountability Specialist
- present at exit interview.
The inspector also interviewed other licensee employees involved with nuclear msterial control and production.
2.
Facility Operations and Internal Control The inspector observed that the authorized possession and use of special
' nuclear material were as specified in the facility license.
The inspector reviewed the licensee's storage and internal control practices applicable to the two material balance areas (MBA's) and two item control areas (ICA's) and determined that the licensee properly prepared and maintained control of SNM transfer documerits. All of the MBA and ICA internal transfer documents issued in the physical inventory period of February 27, 1986 through October 8, 1986 were reviewed by the inspector for proper signature, measured quantities, location, and timeliness. No discrepancies were identified.
3.
Physical Inventory The licensee is cperating under a US/IAEA Safeguards protocol agreement that requires a complete physical inventory of the low enriched uranium on a yearly basis. The results of the physical inventory are to be reported to the IAEA on DOE /NRC Form-742. The licensee requested a 15 day extension to the thirty-day physical inventory reconciliation period for the October 8,1986 physical inventory. The extension was granted by the NRC's Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, Division of Safeguards by letter on September 4, 1986.
The inspector noted that the licensee had completed the reconciliation prior to November 13, 1986, as required by the terms of the extension.
During this inspection, the inspector audited the supporting data used to establish the total low enriched uranium physical inventory.
The supporting inventory data consisted of handwritten inventory sheets used by the inventory teams, computer printouts containing individual items l
l l
l l
.m_______
3 1.
and inventory sheet summaries, a record documenting control of inventory tags and sheets, and specific inventory instructions.
Each of the line items, which appeared on the handwritten inventory sheets, was compared to the computer printout and a sample of page totals was reviewed by the inspector. Also, the total of the four inventory areas on the computer printouts was checked against the booked physical inventory.
The results of the audit identified the following discrepancies:
a.
A line item for a tray of pellets, which appeared on the hand-written inventory sheet and which was shown to contain 7,496 grams of uranium and 255 grams of uranium 235, did not appear on the final computer summary.
b.
A line item for micro mounts, which appeared on the handwritten inventory sheet and which was shown to contain 272 grams of uranium and 10 grams of uranium 235, did not appear on the final computer summary.
c.
Two additional items for micro mounts appeared to be inventoried twice on the handwritten inventory sheet.
The duplicate entry amounted to 19 grams of uranium and 1 gram of uranium 235.
d.
A line item for filters appeared on the handwritten inventory sheet as 2,524 grams of uranium and 63 grams of uranium 235.
However, the uranium was incorrectly shown as 25,235 grams on the final computer s umma ry, e.
A line item for a loaded fuel rod, which appeared on the handwritten inventory sheet and was shown to contain 2,080 grams of uranium and 76 grams of uranium 235, incorrectly showed the uranium as 2,098 grams on the final computer summary.
f.
A line item for a fuel bundle on the handwritten inventory sheet was incorrectly shown as 8,24@ grams of uranium 235.
It should have been shown as 8,2g4 grams of uranium 235.
g.
Three line items for three trays of pellets on the handwritten inventory sheet showed questionable net weights.
The pellet trays were indicated as having a net weight of ",910,"",815 " and "11,75."
The computer summary showed the net weights as 910 grams, 815 grams, and 1,175 grams.
h.
Approximately twenty three inventory line items on the final computer summary showed an incorrect inventory tag number when compared to the tag number shown on the handwritten inventory sheet.
i 4
Failure to provide written instructions to personnel that were sufficient to assure accurate verification of the transfer of inventory data from the handwritten inventory sheets to the final computer inventory summary report was identified as an apparent violation of 10 CFR 70.51(f)(4)(v) (87-04-01).
Through discussions with licensee representatives, the inspector determined that the licensee had initiated an investigation of the discrepancies identified by the inspector and had indicated that appropriate. adjustments will be made to the physical inventory records.
4.
Exit Meeting The inspector met with the licensee representatives indicated in para-graph 1 at the conclusion of the inspection on June 26, 1987. The inspector summarized the scope and findings of the inspection.
At no t'me during the inspection was written material provided to the licensee by the inspector.
.7C 4
L
1 -
1 -
l N
i e
C o m f
co MO
> e
.o n.a J
_ - - _ - _ _ _. _ _ _. _ _ _ _ _ _. _.