DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES SAFETY BOARD

February 7, 1997

TO:
 

G. W. Cunningham, Technical Director

FROM:
 

P.F. Gubanc & D.G. Ogg, Hanford Site Representatives

SUBJECT:
 

Activity Report for Week Ending February 7, 1997

Staff member Ralph Arcaro was on-site this week to review tank characterization and safety documentation progress and to attend a DOE-wide systems engineering conference.

A. "As-Built" Drawing Issues: A recurring issue across the site has been the adequacy of as-built drawings for use by operations and maintenance personnel. Incorrect as-built drawings are frequently cited as a contributing cause of near-miss events on site. The following information relative to this subject was obtained this week:

  1. Following the 701-A near-miss event last June, Tank Farms reconstituted its labeling and drawing upgrade program into a project organization. On February 7, Mr. Gubanc reviewed the project's progress. The project enjoys strong DOE and contractor management support, is clearly focused and involves the appropriate standards and workers. Delivery of the first upgraded tank farm is expected in early Spring 1997.
  2. In November 1996, a tank farm cognizant engineer walked down a set of 35 drawings, which he understood to be "as-built", for a newly installed tie-in from the 222-S laboratory. He identified 56 discrepancies with the new drawings and 16 instances where existing tank farm drawings also needed revision. The Project Manager contends these drawings were not formally transmitted for approval but only for information. Mr. Gubanc is gathering more data.
  3. As discussed in our letter of December 20, 1996, "independent inspection" of site construction projects is currently performed by the same contractor who is responsible for the construction, Fluor Daniel Northwest (FDNW). On January 27, 1997, DOE-RL formally asked Fluor Daniel Hanford (FDH) to demonstrate the independence of the construction inspection function performed by FDNW.

The subject of rigorous configuration management, especially for new projects, is gaining recognition as a major site-wide issue. We will continue to follow this area closely.

B. Pu Stabilization Milestones: On February 3, we met with DOE-RL to discuss the status of Recommendation 94-1 Pu stabilization milestones. Similar to the situation in the TWRS program and the SNF program, the shortfall in the FY 1997 budget will affect the contractors ability to meet some of the key Board recommendation milestones. In the case of Pu stabilization, DOE-RL is currently unwilling to admit that any milestone will be missed, pending negotiations at the national level on Pu disposition, Pu packaging standards for long-term storage, and potential use of Pu in tritium production. However, in its December 1996 monthly progress report for Pu stabilization, DOE-RL reported that the milestone to commence solution stabilization by June 1997, (milestone IP-3.1-022) was at risk due to a lack of funding.

Additionally, the Plutonium Stabilization and Packaging (PuSAP) system, originally scheduled to be complete by December 1998, (milestone IP-3.2-029) is delayed about one year because DOE has identified the project as a FY 1998 line item rather than a FY 1997 line item as planned.

C. Canister Storage Building (CSB) Construction: On February 5, Mowat placed concrete for the deck of the second vault in the CSB. While this activity was originally scheduled during the week of February 17, no outstanding issues remained to prevent the start of work. Concrete placement for the deck of the third vault will not commence until Duke resolves a Design Change Notice on the position of the Hot Conditioning System pits. DOE-RL expects this activity will be complete during the week of February 17.

D. N-Basin Monolith Recovery: On February 4, Mr. Ogg observed a Bechtel (BHI) test of a new rigging arrangement proposed for use in recovering the #10 monolith from the floor of the N-Basin. The new arrangement makes use of four 12-ton capacity plate clamps that will grasp the ½" thick steel plate sides of the monolith. This is necessary because the regular lifting trunnions of the monolith were damaged during the drop. The mock-up test consisted of an outdoor crane lift of a clean monolith loaded with weights and water using the new rigging. The plate clamps appeared to hold the cask firmly with no indication of slippage. BHI plans to retrieve the #10 monolith during the week of February 10.

cc: Board Members