ML20148F034
| ML20148F034 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | NS Savannah |
| Issue date: | 03/09/1988 |
| From: | Bassett C, Fredrickson P, Mccoy F NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20148F011 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-238-87-01, 50-238-87-1, NUDOCS 8803280052 | |
| Download: ML20148F034 (5) | |
See also: IR 05000238/1987001
Text
..
..
...
- - -
.
.
.
.
UWlVED STATES
pQ Clo g'o
u
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
p
,
"
y
REGION 11
o
g
j
101 MARIETTA STREET,N.W.
,
I, t
ATLANTA, GEORGI A 30323
%,***.*/
Report No.: 50-238/87-01
Licensee: State of South Carolina
,
Patriot's Point Development Authority
Post Office Box 986
Mount Pleasant, SC 29464
Docket No.:
50-238
License No.:
NS-1
Facility Name:
N.S. Savannah
'Of
b!BB
Inspectors:
F. R. McCoy
Date Signed
,
bN
3l9l6S
.'d
sett
Date Signed
Approved by:
4 f4
4%
ihk
.
.
P. E. Fredrickson, Section Chief
Date Signed
Division of Reactor Projects
SUMMARY
Scope:
This routine, unannounced inspection was in the areas of radiation
,
protection.
Results: One violation was identified:
failure to post and secure a radiation
control area, paragraph 4.c.
l
8803280052 880314
ADOCK 05000238
O
'
_ -_ _ ,- . _ .
,, _ _ _ . - -
- . . , _ - , . . . _
_ . . , _ , -
_
- . - -
. . ~
_ =
_
_
__ _
.
.
.
3
REPORT DETAILS
1.
Persons Contacted
Licensee Employees
- C
Waldrop, Deputy Director, Patriots Point Development Authority (PPDA)
J. Blanford, Assistant Director for Engineering, PPDA
J. Guerry, Chairman, Executive Director, PPDA
Other licensee employees contacted included security force members, and
office personnel.
Other Organizations
F. Levine, Director, Office of Advance Ship Operations, Maritime
Administration
J. Davis, Chief, Division of Ship Management, Maritime Administration
H. Shealy, Chief, Bureau of Radiological Health, South Carolina
Department of Health and Environmental Control (SC DEHC)
V. Autry, Director, Division of Radioactive Materials, Licensing and
Compliance, SC DEHC
P. O'Kelley, Health Physicist, SC DEHC
<
- Attended exit interview on November 27, 1987, and December 11, 1987
2.
ExitInterview(30703)
The inspection scope and findings were summarized on November 27 and
December 11, 1987, with those persons indicated in paragraph 1 above. The
'
inspector described the areas inspected and discussed in detail the
inspection findings including an apparent violation of the Technical
Specifications for failure to post and secure a radiation control area.
The licensee acknowledged the inspection findings and took no exception.
The licensee did not identify as proprietary any of the material provided
to or reviewed by the inspector during this inspection.
3.
Licensee Action on Previous Enforcement Matters
This subject was not addresse'd in the inspection.
4.
Survey Results (40755)
'
a.
Technical Specification (TS) 3.3.1 defines areas that may be used for
museum tour routes and displays, lodging accommodations for visitors
4
and employees and restaurant and concession facilities as unrest-
ricted areas.
The radiation levels in unrestricted areas from
reactor generated radioactive materials as required by TS 3.3.1 to
4
i
3
.
2
.
be less than 5 micro rem per hour (uR/hr) above natural background as
measured at one meter from any surface.
A radiation survey of the tour route open to the general public was
conducted on November 25, 1987, for A through D decks, the promenade
deck, boat deck and navigation bridge -using an NRC portable survey
instrument. The highest reading detected was 3 UR/hr.
No violations or deviations were identified,
b.
Technical Specification 3.3.1 states that areas with it als in excess
of five uR/hr but less than 0.25 mR/hr may be entered without health-
physics supervision provided a health physicist has detennined that
potential exposures to any individual will not exceed five percent of
10 CFR 20.101 exposure limits and the Review and Audit Committee has
reviewed and accepted the proposed use of the space. On November 25,
1987, the inspectur conducted a radiation survey of selected areas
which were restricted from use by the general public but which were
accessible by employees without' health physics supervision. Several
areas with radiation levels between five and 0.25 mR/hr at one meter
from the surface were observed where access to employees was allowed.
Examples include:
Cargo Hold 4 (hold area aft port corner) - 17 uR/hr
Cargo Hold 4 (C level of aft starboard area) - 200 uR/hr
Entrance to Rooms B1 and B3 and adjatent lighting center - 8 uR/hr
The inspector also reviewed a surve" performed by the SC DHEC on
March 26, 1987, which reflected levets of 150 uR/hr at aft Bulkhead
"C" deck level Cargo Hold 4, and 10 and 11 uR/hr outside the star-
board and post pump room hatches, lower level engine room.
On December 11, 1987, tne licensee provided time motion analyses
which established stay times for various radiation levels which might
be encountered on the ship.
Hcwever, the licensee could provide
little evidence of any implementation pian to assure these stay times
1
were invoked for employee access to those areas.
The licensee has
been requested to describe how they hive and will continue to use
stay times to limit employee exposure.
Since there were no cases
observed by the inspector where personnel were within these areas in
a manner which would have resulted in exceeding 5% of 10 CFR 20.101
exposure limits, no violation will be cited.
NRC verification of
this program implementation will be accomplished during a future
inspection. Resolution of this concern is identified as an inspector
followup item (50-238/87-01-02).
c.
Technical Specification (TS) 3.3 defines a radiation control area as
an area of the ship with radiation levels from reactor generated
reactor materials in excess of 0.25 millirem per hour (mR/hr) (or
_
..
-_
_
_ _
l
.
'
3
250 uR/hr) above natural background as measured at one meter from any
surface.
TS 3.3 also requires that entrances to such areas be posted
with appropriate caution and warning. signs, locked and secured with
chains and sealed with numbered seals.
During the course of the
survey on November 25, 1987, a portion of the aft starboard bulkhead
of Cargo Hold 4 at the D deck level was noted to have a radiation
level of approximately 1800 uR/hr at contact and 450 uR/hr 'at one
meter from the surface.
These readings _ were confirmed by the NRC
,
inspector and a SC DEHC health physicist on December 11, 1987.
At
the time of the initial survey by the NRC inspector, access to the D
deck level of Cargo Hold 4 was not locked, posted as a radiation
control area, chained, or sealed.
Failure to post and lock a radiation control area was identified as
an apparent violation of Technical Specification 3.3 .(50-238/
87-01-01).
d.
Technical Specification 3.3.1 requires that all surfaces in radiation
control areas and unrestricted areas be maintained with contamination
levels less than those prescribed in Table 1 of NRC Regulatory Guide 1.86.
Table 1 of Regulatory Guide 1.86 states that removable surface
contamination for beta-gamma emitting nuclides shall be less than
1,000 disintegrations per minute per one hundred square centimeters
(1,000 dpm/100 cm2).
Six smear samples were taken at locations on the tour route and six
smear samples were taken at locations which were restricted from use
by the general public but not from access by employees.
The samples
were analyzed on a proportional counter in the Region II office for
gamma isotopic and gross beta activity.
The results showed no
detectable activity on any smear above the minimum detectable
activity (MDA) of the counter of 1.2 disintegration per minute per
smear.
No violations or deviations were identified.
5.
Record Review (40755)
a.
The inspector reviewed minutes from the December 6,
1985 and
December 12, 1986, Review and Audit. Committee meetings to verify
,
compliance with Technical Specification 3.6.4 which requires at least
an annual committee meeting.
No violations or deviations were identified.
b.
Technical Specifications 3.7.2.2 and 3.7.6 require that semi-annual
radiological surveys be made and that annual inspections be conducted
to determine any degradation of the primary and secondary systems.
The inspector reviewed licensee radiation surveys of April 10, 1987,
March 26, 1987, September 18, 1985, and March 20,198b to verify
compliance.
,
,
-
_
-.
. ,
.-
-
-
-
. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .
._
,
.
.
b
4
.
No violations or deviations were identified.
c.
Technical Specification 3.7.5 requires an underwater inspection of
the hull at least every four years.
The inspector reviewed survey
results dated January 7,
1987, for a hull survey conducted in
December 1986.
No violations or deviations were identified.
d.
The inspector reviewed quarterly intrusion alarm and seal inspections
as required by TS 3.7.2.1, of October 28, 1987, September 8, 1987,
April 15, 1987, March 26, 1987, February 26, 1987, November 10, 1986,
August 25, 1986, May 30, 1986 and February 26, 1986, and, with the
exception of a five month period from April 15, 1987 to September 8,
1987, no deficiencies were i. ted.
No violations or deviations were identified.
6.
Intrusion Alarm Verification (40755)
Technical Specification 3.7.1.1.5 requires that the entrance into the
reactor compartment be fitted with an intrusion alarm with audible and
visual signals located at a location that is manned by a guard or security
officer.
On November 25, 1987, the inspector accompanied a security guard to the
manned security guard post while the Deputy Director, PPDA attempted to
open the B deck entry door into the reactor compartment.
This action
should have activated an intrusion alarm with both audible and visual
signals at the guard post.
A white rotating light at the top of the ship
was observed at the guard post when the door was opened but no audible
alarm was heard.
The inspector and guard were only able to hear the alarm
after boarding the ship.
It was determined that an abnormally strong wind
blowing in a direction directly from the guard post to the ship was the
main contributor to this occurrence and that under normal conditions the
alarm would be heard.
Consequently, due to these special circumstances,
no violation will be cited.
The licensee should, however, take action to
ensure that alarms can be heard under adverse environmental conditions.
Future NRC verification of licensee resolution is identified as inspector
followup item (50-238/87-01-03).