IR 05000238/1998201
| ML20216G682 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | NS Savannah |
| Issue date: | 03/11/1998 |
| From: | NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20216G618 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-238-98-201, NUDOCS 9803200065 | |
| Download: ML20216G682 (9) | |
Text
r.
L 3 2, <
m,
!-
Ii l
j.
U.S. NUCLEAR HEGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION Docket No.:
50-238 L
License No.:
NS-1 -
!
'
Report No.:
50-238/98-201 Licensee:
U. S. Maritime Administration Washington, D. C. 20509 t.
l
'
t-Facility Name:
N. S. Savannah i
Location:
James River Reserve Fleet l
Ft. Eustis, VA l
. inspection Conducted:
-January 28-30,1998
_
i i
Inspector:
C. H. Bassett, Senior Non-Power Reactor Inspector l
j Approved by:
Marvin M. Mendonca, Acting Director Non-Power Reactors and Oecommissioning
l Project Directorate j'
, Division of Reactor Program Management i
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
!
i
-
9803200065 980311
PDR ADOCK 05000238 G
.,
-
.
a
,
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY N. S. Savannah NRC Inspection Report No. 50-238/98-201 The primary focus of this routine, announced inspection involved the on-site review of radiation protection and security control measures implemented for the N. S. Savannah at her anchorage alongside the decommissioned U.S. Army Corps of Engineers MH-1 A Floating Nuclear Power Plant STURGIS in the James River Reserve Fleet, near Ft. Eustis, Virginia.
Staffing and Audits The licensee's staffing and auditing of activities remain in compliance with the e
- requirements specified in the Technical Specifications.
Radiological Surveys Surveys were being completed as required.
- Doses to James River Reserve Fleet personnel were well within the NRC's e
regulatory limits, e -
Thermoluminescent dosimeters were noted to be in place as required by the Technical Specifications (TS).
Radiation levels in areas routinely entered by James River Reserve Fleet personnel e
were within those allowed by the TS, Access Control and Security Access control and security was acceptable and being maintained as stipulated in e
the TS.
Surveillances in general surveillances were being completed acceptably and within the time frame e
requirements of the TS.
Water and sediment samples had been taken and analyzed as required.
e
.
_ _ - - - - -. _... _. -. -
(*
- -.
!
, - *
REPORT DETAILS l
Summary of Plant Status
- The N. S. Savannah was removed from service and mothballed in 1970. There is no
!
reactor fuel on board and all primary and secondary systemt have been drained. All
. radioactive resins were also removed from the ship and any remaining radioactive material is contained within the reactor vessel and it's intemal components. The vessel is currently
' moored port side to the MH-1 A Floating Nuclear Power Plant STURGIS in the James River,
!
Virginia. It is secured in place by nine anchors and ten mooring wire ropes. Access to the vessel and to the restricted areas of the vessel is being provided by James River Reserve Fleet (JRRF) personnel. Annual radiation surveys of the vessel are being completed by a contractor working for the Maritime Administration (MARAD).
1.
Staffing and Audits (40755)
a.
Inspection Scope The inspector reviewed the following regarding the licensee's staffing and audits to ensure that the requirements of TS Sections 3.6 were met:
e staffing requirements for safe maintenance of the vessel, e
the composition of the Review and Audit Committee (RAC),
e RAC responsibilities and meeting minutes, and e
audits performed during 1995-1997.
b.
Observations and Findings Through observation of operations and discussions with licensee personnel, l
the inspector determined that the staffing was adequate to support the safe maintenance of the N. S. Savannah.
Through discussions with licensee representatives and record reviews, the inspector determined that the RAC was composed of those individuals stipulated in the TS. The RAC met once a year to review and discuss the status of the ship and the other issues outlined in the TS. Audits were conducted as required and findings resolved.
c.
Conclusions The licensee's staffing and auditing of activities remain in compliance with the requirements specified in the Technical Specifications.
.
l
!'
I i
L
y
.
l s I
2.
Radiological Surveys (40755)
a.
Inspection Scope The inspector reviewed the following to verify compliance with 10 CFR 20 and the applicable licensee TS requirements:
health physics survey and dosimetry records,
.
radiological signs and posting,
.
document on of inspections of the ship, and e
annual reports.
J
=
b.
Observations and Findings (1)
Tour of the Ship Generally surveys were being completed and documented acceptably
'
to permit evaluation of the radiation hazards that might exist.
Postings met regulatory requirements. Personnel dosimetry, supplied by the Radiation Protection Officer (RPO) for Ft. Eustis, was being worn as required. Doses were well within the licensee's procedural action levels and the NRC's regulatory limits. Thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs) were noted to be in place at various locations on the ship as required by TS.
(2)
Radiological Criteria for Unrestricted and Restricted Areas TS 3.3.1 defines an unrestricted area as an area that is accessible to employees, contractor personnel, esco ted guests, and official visitors. The radiation levels from reactor generated radioactive materials for unrestricted areas shall be less than SuR/hr (microrem per hour) above natural background as measured at one meter from any surface. A restricted area is an area with radiation levels in excess of 5 pR/hr but less than 0.25 mR/hr (millirem per hour). A restricted area may be entered without health physics supervision under the following conditions:
la)
A health physicist has determined that pptential exposures to any individual will not exceed five pe.rcent (5 %) of 10 CFR 20.101 (10 CFR 20.1301) exposure limits.
(b)
The Review and Audit Committee has reviewed and accepted the proposed use of the space.
t I
.
.-
A radiation level survey of selected areas on the vessel was conducted by the inspector using NRC portable survey instrumentation. The survey included readings from the engine room and A through D decks, the prorranade deck, and the boat deck.
Radiation levels greater than 5 R/hr above natural background were detected in some of these areas, in discussing this matter with the licensee, they indicated that these areas were areas that were not routinely entered by JRRF personnel.
The inspector requested to rev!ew the assessment made by the health physicist that indicated that any individuals entering these areas would not exceed the exposure limits specified ir; 10 CFR 20. The licensee stated that no written assessrnent had been made because JRRF personnel do not routinely enter areas with radiation levels in excess of 5 pR/hr. However, the licensee indicated that an assessment would be made. Subsequent to the inspection, the licensee forwarded a copy of the assessment made by a health physics (HP) contractor on February 6,1998. The conclusion of the assessment was that the maximum dose a person would receive if they were present for 2080 hours0.0241 days <br />0.578 hours <br />0.00344 weeks <br />7.9144e-4 months <br /> per year would be approximately 225 mR per year. This would be less than five percent of the 10 CFR 20.1301 ' limit.
c.
Conclusions Surveys were being completed as required. Doses to JRRF personnel were well within the NRC's regulatory limits. Thermoluminescent dosimeters were noted to be in place as required by TS. Radiation levels in areas routinely entered by JRRF personnel were within those allowed by the TS.
3.
Access Control and Security a.
Inspection Scope The inspector reviewed the following to verify that the licensee was providing adequate access control and security in compliance with TS 3.7.1 requirements:
l:
security logs,
-
l maintenance records,
!
documentation of seal inspections, and
.
inspection reports.
e l
.
l l
l l
L
t.
,
.
.,.
b.
Observations and Findings The inspector noted that all entrances to the ship were secured when not in use. The entrances to the reactor compartment were secured as required.
Radiation control areas were posted, locked, and sealed. The entrance to the reactor compartment on B Deck was chained, posted, sealed, and double locked. Although there was a problem with the intrusion alarm at the time of the inspection, security personnel completed a patrol of the vessel at least once during every twenty-four hour period and JRRF personnel inspected the ship daily during the work week. A new cable was being purchased to correct the problem with the intrusion alarm. The licensee anticipated that the repairs would be completed in approximately two months.
c.
Conclusions Access control and security was acceptable and being maintained as stipulated in the TS.
4.
Surveillances a.
Inspection Scope The inspector revie wed the following to verify that the licensee was providing adequate access control and security in compliance with TS 3.7.2 I
requirements:
contractor reports,
.
maintenance records,
=
documentation of inspections of the ship, and
.
annual reports.
.
b.
Observations and Findings (1)
General Surveillance items
,
The inspector determined that JRRF personnel were checking the seals on the controlled area doors and testing the intrusion alarm once a quarter. Two draft level stripes were painted fore and att as required,~ one just above the water level and the upper stripe one foot j
above the lower. The cathodic protection system was being I
maintained to protect the underwater areas of the vessel's hull.
Underwater inspections of the hull were being conducted annually.
Also, MARAD designated personnel were completing an ennual
inspection of the primary and secondary systems to check for any I
degradation that might have occurred.
)
i t
I
-
.
..
l
!
(2)
Semi-annual Sediment Samples TS 3.7.2.5 requires that water samples and bottom sediment samples be taken semi-a.inually adjacent to the ship and analyzed by a qualified laboratory for radioactivity.
The inspector reviewed the annual reports submitted by the licensee
,
!
for the past two years. The reports showed that water samples had l
been taken and analyzed but no results were present for any
,
sediments samples. The licensee indicated that the results of the
!
analyses of the sediment samples had inadvertently been left out of l
the annual report and that the data were available through the HP -
'
contractor. Subsequent to the inspection, the licensee forwarded a copy of the results of the analyces of the sediment samples. The i
results had been supplied to the licensee by the HP contractor on i
February 6,1998. This met the TS requirements.
l c.
Conclusions in general surveillances were being completed acceptably and within the time frame requirements of the TS. Water and sediment samples had been taken and analyzed as required.
i 3.
Exit Interview l
f l
The inspection scope and results were summarized on January 30,1998, with licerisee personnel. The inspector described the areas inspected and discussed in detail the inspection findings.
No dissenting comments were received from the licensee. The licensee did not idantify as p oprietary any of the material provided to or reviewed by the inspecto,
_
.
.
. _ _ _
- _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _
.
.
.
PARTIAL LIST OF PERSONS CONTACTED Licensee Employees M. Bagley, Fleet Operations and Ma.ntenance Officer, JRRF, MARAD, Department of Transportation (DOT)
E. Koehler, Marine Surveyor, MARAD, DOT.
Z. Levine, Senior Technical Advisor, MARAD, DOT
J. Seelinger, Chief, Division of Ship Maintenance and Repair, MARAD, DOT P. Smith, Fleet Superintendent, JRRF, MARAD, DOT Other Personnel S
J. Davis, Certified Health Physicist, General Health Physics INSPECTION PROCEDURE USED IP 40755 Class ill Non-Power Reactors
'
ITEMS OPENED, CLOSED, AND DISCUSSED Opened None j
Closed None
.
_,
..
.
...
.
.
.
s
..
.
LIST OF ACRONYMS USED CFR Code of Federal Regulations DOT Department of Transportation IP inspection Procedure JRRF James River Reserve Fleet MARAD Maritime Administration
'NPR.
Non-Power Reactor.
NRC Nuclear Regulatory Commission NRR Nuclear Reactor Regulation PDR'
Public Document Room RAC Review and Audit Committee RPO Radiation Protection Officer TLD Thermoluminescent dosimeter TS Technical Specification
'!
l
!
!
.
.