ML20133D127

Insp Rept 70-1113/85-07 on 850414-19.No Violation Noted. Major Areas Inspected:Mgt Organization & Controls,Operator Training/Retraining & Nuclear Criticality Safety & Operations Review

ML20133D127
Person / Time
Site:	07001113
Issue date:	05/01/1985
From:	Kahle J, Mcalpine E NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
To:
Shared Package
ML20133D104	List: ML20133D101 ML20133D127
References
70-1113-85-07, 70-1113-85-7, NUDOCS 8507220112
Download: ML20133D127 (6)

Text

_________ .

e

• p REfg UNITED STATES p je NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[ p REGION 11 g j 101 MARtETTA STREET.N.W.

• t ATLANTA, GEORGI A 30323

'**.....#' yay i 31985 Report No.: 70-1113/85-07 Licensee: General Electric Company Wilmington, NC 28401 Docket No.: 70-1113 License No.: SNM-1097 Facility Name: Nuclear Fuel Manufacturing Inspection Conducted: April 14 - 19, 1985 Inspector:

J. B. Kahl

-' MM1tld

5 f(

Datfe Signed Approved by: v NO 5/l/f6 E. J. McAlpihe, Section Chief Date Signed Division of Radiation Safety and Safeguards

SUMMARY

Scope: This routine, unannounced inspection entailed 38 inspector-hours on site in the areas of management organization and controls, operator training /

retraining, nuclear criticality safety and operations review.

Results: Of the four areas inspected, no violations or deviations were identified.

1 I

E507220112 850513 hDR ADOCK 07001113 PDR u

W

=

REPORT DETAILS

1. Licensee Employees Contacted I

• J. E. Bergman, Mcnager, Manufacturing J

• W. W. McMahon, Manager, Quality Assurance  ;

• C. M. Vaughan, Manager, Regulatory Compliance

• W. C. Peters, Manager, Nuclear Safety Engineering R. L. Torres, Manager, Radiation Protection

• J. H. Bradberry, Manager, Security and Emergency Preparedness  ;

• R. G. Lewis, Supervisor, Radiation Protection '

J. R. Watkins, Acting Manager, Powder Production

• E. A. Schaefer, Senior Engineer, Chemical Lab

• D. W. Brown, Manager, Uranium Recycle Operation o

• T. P. Winslow, Manager, CHEMET Laboratory S. W. Dale, Manager, UPMP Program ,

}

• B. S. Dunn, Licensing Administrator

• R. H. D. Foleck, Senior Specialist, Licensing Engineering  :

G. M. Bowman, .enior Nuclear Safety Engineer "

• P. S. Stansbury, Senior Nuclear Safety Engineer '

J. T. Taylor, Senior Nuclear Safety Engineer F. G. Welfare, Senior Nuclear Safety Engineer i H. W. Webb, Senior Nuclear Safety Engineer '

• S. P. Murray, Senior Nuclear Safety Engineer 7 R. J. Keenan, Nuclear Safety Engineer Other licensee employees contacted included two technicians, nineteen i operators, four security force members, and two office personnel.  ?

• Attended exit interview

2. Exit Interview -

The inspection scope and findings were summarized on April 19, 1985, with )

those persons indicated in paragraph I above. The licensee stated that -

design, process and operational information associated with the Uranium .

Process Management Project (UPMP) would be considered company proprietary under the terms of 10 CFR 2.790. The inspector acknowledged their request. .

E

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

4. Management Organization and Controls (88005)  ?

a. Organizational Structure

! The inspector _ verified that the licensee's key positions with safety T related responsibilities (area manager, criticality safety function, -

radiation safety function, radiation protection function, environmental '

b

2 protection function, and regulatory compliance function) were established as described in the license application. The designated responsibilities of the key positicns agreed with or exceeded those depicted in the license application. The inspector verified that the qualifications of the personnel filling the required key positions met or exceeded the specifications described in the license application.

No violations or deviations were identified.

b. Procedure Control The inspector verified that the licensee has established and is maintaining a system for issuing and controlling procedures. Verifica-tion was made that procedures were reviewed and revised, if necessary, at least annually. Document Control issues procedure changes to designated recipients and maintains a system to assure that only current procedures are avaijable to operators. A review of several operating procedures during tours of the operating areas showed that operating procedures were current and available to operating personnel.

No violations or deviations were identified.

c. Reviews and Audits The inspector verified that the licensee has implemented programs for inspecting and auditing facility operations on a daily and quarterly basis. The radiation protection technicians inspect operations continuously on a shift basis. The nuclear safety engineers (criticality safety and radiation safety) perform comprehensive audits of operations quarterly. The nuclear safety audits usually take one to two weeks. Verificaticn was made that inspection and audit findings are immediately brought to the attention of operating and nuclear safety management. Items identified by the shift inspections are reviewed by the nuclear safety manager. Generic issues and corrective actions to prevent recurrence are reviewed, discussed and tracked by the operational radiation safety committee. Items identified by the quarterly audits are communicated to operations for immediate corrective action. A review of the audit findings by the regulatory compliance manager identifies potential regulatory noncompliance.

These are transmitted to management requesting a response as to final corrective actions. A review of the records showed that investigations were performed to determine the cause of the potential noncompliance and actions were taken to prevent recurrence. A licensee representative stated that they have initiated a program through management and operator awareness of examples of potential noncompliance to reduce the number of items identified by their internal audit and inspection program.

The inspector reviewed the annual external audit results performed by the licensee's corporate Nuclear Safety Assurance, Quality Assurance and Reliability Operation from San Jose, California. The licensee has 1 implemented a tracking system to assign responsibility and complete  !

remedial action for each findings until closure.

3 No violations or deviations were identified,

d. Safety Committees The inspector reviewed the meeting minutes of the Wilmington Safety Review Committee (WSRC) and the Operational Radiation Safety Committee.

The inspector verified that the activities of the WSRC met the require-ments of the license application. Action items were identified and tracked until their closure. The Operational Radiation Safety Committee meeting minutes showed that manufacturing operational equipment upgrade items were identified with assigned responsibilities for actions, tracking, reporting and completion target dates. It was apparent that operational problems were identified with committee

~ '

assistance for remedial action to reduce sources of airborne and 4 surface contamination. No violations or deviations were identified.

5. Operator Training / Retraining (88010)

The inspector reviewed the licensee's program for providing site specific training for NRC inspectors and discussed the procedures for NRC inspectors to enter the plant and secure badging for unescorted access to the control area. The inspector verified that control area operators were provided nuclear safety retraining as required by the license. The agenda or scope of the nuclear safety training was inspected during an inspection in January 1985 (Inspection Report 85-02). During tours of the process areas discussions with individuals revealed that they had received nuclear safety training within the past year. No violations or deviations were identified during this inspection.

6. Nuclear Criticality Safety (88015)

a. Facility Modification and Changes The inspector reviewed the following licensee procedures for performing nuclear safety reviews:

P/P 40-5, Nuclear Safety Review System NSI E-1.0, Nuclear Safety Record NSI E-3.0, Nuclear Safety Review Requests NSI E-4.0, Criticality Safety Analysis Methods and Verification The inspector concluded the procedures were adequate. Several nuclear safety review packages were examined by the inspector. Verification was made that the records contained all the documents required by the licensee's procedures. The inspector verified that acceptable methods were used in the analyses and that the analyses and results were verified by an independent reviewer. Supporting calculations and data were contained in the packages. The inspector verified that preopera-tional audits had been performed prior to issuance of a final approval by nuclear safety and that a Nuclear Safety Release / Requirement (NSR/R)

4 was issued to operations. During tours of the process area the inspector verified that NSR/Rs were available with the operating procedures. No violations or deviations were identified.

b. Criticality Alarm System The inspector reviewed the calibration procedure with a licensee representative and discussed the details of the weekly source check and the annual calibration. A technician demonstrated the technique used for establishing the source-to-detector distances when calibrating the criticality warning system detectors. The inspector concluded the procedure was adequate. An examination of the records showed that the '

detectors were calibrated on an annual basis. No violations or deviations were identified.

c. Storage and Handling Special Nuclear Material (SNM)

During tours of the process and storage areas the inspector verified that containers of SNM were stored in accordance with the licensee's procedures that containers of material were not placed in unauthorized locations. The presence of unsafe geometry containers were authorized and properly controlled through administrative or mechanical controls.

No violations or deviations were identified.

d. Ventilation Ducts Licensee representatives stated that a number of years ago a surveil-lance procedure was implemented to survey horizontal portions of ventilation ducts on a monthly basis for accumulations of SNM. They stated that only small quantities of SNM has been detected at the elbows of some ducts and that accumulation of material has not been a problem. As a result of an NRC notification that this may be a problem at uranium processing plants, an evaluation was performed to assess the potential at the plant and a special survey was conducted of the suspect areas. Negative results were found. No violations or deviations were identified.

7. Operations Review (88020)

a. During tours of the control areas the inspector talked with operators to determine their awareness of the location of operating procedures-and the basic nuclear criticality safety requirements. Operators knew where the procedures were located and were familiar with nuclear criticality safety requirements. Operating personnel stated that they I had received nuclear safety training within the past year. Observation of workers' ' activities showed that work was being performed in accordance with operating procedures. The inspector verified that safety equipment required by licensee procedures and license conditions was present as required. No violations or deviations were identified.

l 1

5

b. Uranium Process Management Project (UPMP)

The inspector toured the UPMP area and discussed the operating status with licensee representatives. Installation is essentially complete except for some process and nuclear safety control systems. Licensee representatives stated that all systems will be thoroughly checked out prior to introduction of licensed material into the system. Also, each process will be started up individually and debugged prior to startup of another process. This was confirmed by the individual in the nuclear. safety function who is responsible for authorizing introduction of licensed material. Licensee representatives estimated four to five weeks before introduction of licensed material into the system.

No violations or deviations were identified.

4 s