ML20237E369

Insp Rept 70-0371/87-06 on 870824-26.No Violations or Deviations Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Operations,Nuclear Criticality Safety,Organization,Environ Protection & Nonroutine Events

ML20237E369
Person / Time
Site:	07000371
Issue date:	12/04/1987
From:	Pasciak W, Roth J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
To:
Shared Package
ML20237E364	List: ML20237E362 ML20237E369
References
70-0371-87-06, 70-371-87-6, NUDOCS 8712280295
Download: ML20237E369 (6)

Text

_ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ . _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .

U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION I Report No. 70-371/87-06 Docket No.70-371 License No. SNM-368 Priority 1 Category UHFF Licensee: UNC Naval Products 67 Sample Desert Road Uncasville, Connecticut 06382-0981 Facility Name: UNC Naval Products Inspection at: Montville, Connecticut Inspection Conducted: August 24-26, 1987 Inspectors: / h7 J.@th, Pro' t Engineer dste7 Vi b 0

f1 Approved By: . / d (1 /I A hi h f @[

ff. J. /Pascrak', Chief, Ef fluents idattjf ttion Protection Section, DRSS Rad 4

[

(

l Inspection Summary: Inspection on August 24-26, 1987 (Inspection Report No.

70-371/87-06).

Areat Inspected: Routine, unannounced inspection by a region-based inspector of: operations, nuclear criticality safety, organization, environmental protection and nonroutine events.

Results: No violations or deviations were identified.

l 8712280295 871209 PDR ADOCK 07000371 C. pen

Details

1. Persons Contacted N. Kaufman, President

• G. Waugh, Executive Vice President

• R. Gregg, Director, Technical Services

• W. Kirk, Manager, Nuclear and Industrial Safety

• T. Gutman, Criticality Safety Specialist J. Lawrence, Plant Engineer D. Luster, Radiological and Environmental Control Specialist D. Birks, Criticality Safety Engineer

• Present at the exit interview Other employees were also interviewed during the inspection.

2. Review of Operations The inspector examined all areas of the plant to observe operations and activities in progress, to inspect the nuclear safety aspects of operations and to check the general status of cleanliness, housekeeping, and adherence to fire protection rules.

a. Nuclear Criticality Safety Postings During examination of the Unit 2 area, the inspector observed that a {

hood located on the west wall of the area was posted with two (2) I different NIS Authorizations that specified different nuclear criticality safety limits. The inspector stated that the posting of two different authorizations could be confusing to the operators and should be combined to specify several different controls, as necessary. Licensee representatives stated that the use of two different signs on this hood would be reevaluated.

b. Storage of Non Fuel Components During examination of Building A, the inspector observed what l appeared to be a fuel bearing component stored in an unauthorized location. Through discussions with licensee representatives and close examination of the component, the inspector determined that the component did not contain U-235. It was a mockup of a fuel bearing component. At one time, this component was identified as  !

non fuel bearing but that identification mark had been obliterated.

The inspector stated that all components whether they contain U-235 or not should be stored in a consistent manner unless they are clearly identified as non fuel bearing. Licensee representatives stated that the inspector's comment would be evaluated and adopted. l if appropriate. l

)

9 3

3. Nuclear Criticality Safety

a. Facility Modifications The licensee initiated construction of a major facility addition as authorized by Amendment No. 8 to the facility license dated September 27, 1986. In order to assure that soil to be excavated near the facility septic leach field is not contaminated with uranium, the licensee located the edge of the septic leach field through a trenching operation and established the eastern edge of the new building at about 10 feet west of the septic field. Soil l samples were removed from the trench dug for the building foundation. Those samples will be analyzed for uranium as required by license condition No. 32.

In another area of the facility, the licensee moved the East Building Emergency Generator from the East Building Ventilation Room to a new location on the west side of the new Building M storage I

annex. The licensee also initiated construction of a large addition to the Building S shipping and receiving area and a retaining wall on the slope on the north side of Buildings A and B.

The inspector also noted that, in response to an observation made during the Operational Safety Review conducted by the NRC during October, 1986 (Inspection Report No. 70-371/86-11), the licensee initiated burning of zircalloy chips. Burning of the chips reduces the potential fire hazard formerly caused by interim storage of the chips until shipment offsite. Zircalloy chip burning is conducted in the southeast corner of the site, just south of the East Building,

b. Residual Analysis The inspector reviewed shop procedure SP-121, Revision 1, dated i October 10, 1983, " Residual Testing and Storage". The procedure l provides the instructions required to analyze and properly store residuals generated in the fabrication process. Between October 15, 1986 and August 13, 1987, residual samples were analyzed and 32 iejects were identified. A reject is defined as any sample with a gamma radiation level in excess of a predetermined value. The rejects were removed from the residual storage array and placed in another nuclear safe storage array.

c. Raschig Ring Inspection Licensee records, examined by the inspector, indicated that the raschig ring level in all applicable tanks had been inspected by the licensee at least quarterly between February 25, 1986 and June 30, 1987. No inadequacies were identified.

e 4 >

s

),

d. Criticality Alarm Monitor Calibration E The inspector verified, ththgh a review of licensee records, thet '

the criticality alarm monito*4 had been calibrated at least once, each quarter between August Si 1986 and August 23, 1987. The monitors were also recalibrates., as required, whenever repairs were li made,

e. Internal Reviews and Audits -

The inspector questioned licensee representatives regarding the conduct of internal reviews and audits from January 8,1987 through July 29, 1987. The licensee has placed records of these reviews and audits into a computer program. Displayed on the computer terminal is each of the NIS Authorizations posted throughout the facility (each authorization designates a. storage location, work station or transfer cart), the date that eacn authorization was examined the work shift during that 24 hour2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> period and whether any violations were identified. A hard copy of sch yiolation identified, the corrective action taken, and the cunpletion date is maintained separately by the licensee. The inspector reviewed the computer records of all Nuclear and Industrial Safety inspections which were conducted during this time period. These inspections covered the nuclear safety aspects of operations during regular and off-shift hours. The inspector verified through the examination of licensee written records that corrective actions had been taken or initiated for each violation identified. s

4. Organization Through discussions with licensee representatives, the inspector determined that there had been several organizational or personnel s changes to the Nuclear and Industrial Safety (NIS) Department since'the last inspection. The Medical group, which reported to the Manager, NIS, has been transferred to the Personnel Department; Mr. P. Smith, formerly '

a criticality safety engineer has been replaced by.Mr. D. Birks; and Mr.

J. Newman, a retired nuclear criticality safety specialist, has been hired on a pcrt time basis to conduct routine nuclear criticality safety audits and inspections of the facility.

The inspector examined a resume of Mr. D. Birks' qualifications as a nuclear criticality safety engineer (in trainiag). Mr. Birks has a i Bachelor's degree in Nuclear Engineering and is currently in training to ,i accumulate the one year of experience in performing nuclear criticality' 1  ;

safety assessments and calculations required by Section 2.2.3.3 of the s 1 NRC-approved license application for this position. Mr. Newman has been  !

rehired to fill this position until Mr. Birks is fully qualified. I l

l 1

j

-p 3

,f 1

'\

5

)

5. Sewerage Treatment Plant Sampling Temporary Instruction 2800/9 dated March 25, 1987 specified inspection ]

requirements to determine if there was a problem with reconcentration of radionuclides at sewerage treatment plants servicing several specific.NRC licensees. One of those licensees was UNC Naval Products.

On August 26, 1987, the inspector visited the Montville Water Pollution Control Division Plant located at 51 Pink Row in Montville, Connecticut. l The plant uses an activated sludge extended aeration process to clarify I the waste water. In this process, waste water flows into wet wells (concrete vaults) and then enters the process through a series of screens and channels which are used to remove floating solids and grit. Air is introduced into the liquid flow in large basins to permit microorganism growth and matter digestion. The waste activated sludge from the aeration basins flows to clarify _ tanks. Clarified water is treated and discharged from these tanks. The sludge either goes back into the 4 aeration tank or to a flotation thickener tank. Stablized sludge from the aeration tank is then pumped to the flotation thickener tank where the solids content is increased from 1% to 4% through the addition of a polymer electrolyte. Final sludge processing varies with the season of the year. During the sumer, the sludge is pumped to a digester and is then periodically emptied batchwise to a drying bed. There it is dried, mixed with dirt and buried onsite. During the winter, the sludge is vacuum filtered, air dried, mixed with dirt and buried onsite.

During this visit to the plant on August 26, 1987, the inspector obtained three samples for analysis, a) Influent sample from the wet well.

b) Effluent sample at the plant discharge weir.

c) 4% sludge from the flotation thickner tank.

The samples will be analyzed for gross alpha, gross beta, gross gamma, strontium-90 and uranium isotopic (U-234; U-235 and U-238) content at the DOE Radiciogical ano Environmental Services Laboratory (RESL) located in l Idaho Falls, Idaho. All of the samples were acidified to kill the j bacteria prior to shipment to RESL. The inspector was i 'ormed that the 4% sludge sample coda not be analyzed on a dry basis because of the addition of acid to the sample. Therefore a new sample of sludge was taken from one o' the dry:ng beds by another NRC inspector during the week of November 2, 1987. The results of the analyses of these samples will be reported in a #uture inspection report. This is an inspector followup item (IFI 371/8/- 06-U1) . )

i I

l l

n Y, .+

f:i 'y a i' 'y _, ,

(,1 , ,

6 i

'l '

6. Non-routine Events The inspector determined through review of licensee records and discussions with licensee representatives that no abnormal events, within the scope of this inspection, occurred at this facility since the last inspection.

7. Exit Interview The inspector met with the licensee representatives (denoted in paragraph

1) at the conclusion of the inspection on August 26, 1987. The inspector presented the scope and findings of the inspection. The inspector also held a pre-exit discussion with the Director, Technical Services prior to the exit interview. These discussions were found to be helpful in that licensee management was able to address their planned actions, as a result of inspection findings, at the exit interview.

The inspector did not provide the licensee with any written material during the inspection.

1 I

I

.)

l l