ML19225B729
| ML19225B729 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | North Anna  |
| Issue date: | 06/14/1979 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19225B724 | List: |
| References | |
| SER-790614, NUDOCS 7907250578 | |
| Download: ML19225B729 (2) | |
Text
JUf. i, u?9 SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AKNDENT NO.11 TO LICENSE NO. NPF-4 VIRGINI A ELECTRIC AND POER COBPANY A.
E valuation in Support of R eorganization of the North Anna Power Station, Unit 1 P roduction Operations Department, O nsite and O f f site In a lette dated August 31, 1978, the Virginia Electric and Power Company requesteri an amendment to Operating License iPF-4 for tbrth Anna Power Station, Unit I to reflect a reorganization of the Production Operations Department, onsite and offsite.
In a letter dated December 26, 1978, the /irginia Electric and Power Company provided additional suppleaent il information regarding the off site reorganization.
We reviewed the information suhaitted by the Virginia Electric and Poher Company ard determined additional information was required. As a result of our request for additional information, the Virginia Electric and Power Company submitted the information in letters dated March 8, 1979 and April 27, 1979.
The revised organization for the tbrth Anna plant staff is structured to accomplish its function by four groups: the operations group under the supervision of the Superintendent, Operations; the maintenance group under the supervision of the Superintendent, Maintenance; the technical services group under the supervision of the Siperintendent,
Technical Services ' and an adminis i ative group under the supervisi. n of the Supervisor, Administrative 5 r, ices.
On the basis of our review, we conclude that the plant staff organization meets the provision of Anerican ibclear Society Standard N18. 7-1976/ANS-3.2 as endorsed by Regulatory Guide 1.33, " Quality Assurance Program Requirements (Operation)", and is therefore acceptable to us for the operation of the North Anna Power Station.
3.
E valuation I n Support of P roposed Changes Related to Surveillance Requirements F or I he D iesel Generator B atteries In a letter dated June 14, 1978, we advised the Virginia Electric and Power Company that they propose curveillance requirements which demonstrate the operability of the diesel generator batteries.
e 7 9 07 25 0 g 7> g 452 216
. JUN '
W4 In a letter dated August 14, 1978, the Virginia Electric and Power Company proposed changes to specification 4.8.1.1.3 and 4.8.1.2.
The proposed changes identified additional surveillance requirements for the diesel generator batteries.
The Virginia Electric and Power Company's proposal was modified to make it zcceptable to us.
VEPC0 has agreed to these changes.
We have reviewed the surveillance requirements proposed by the Virginia Electric and Power Company related to the diesel generator batteries and have determined that their proposed changes to the Technical Specifications 4. 8.1.1. 3 and 4. 8.1.2 meet our surveillance requirements for diesel generator batteries, and therefore, are acceptable.
C.
E nvironmental Consideration We have determined that the amendment does not authorize a change in ef fluent types or total amounts nor an ir. crease in power level and will not result in any significant environmental impact. Having made this detennination, we have further concl uded that the amendment involves an action which is insignificant f rom the standpoint of envirciimental impact and, pursuant to 10 CFR Section 51.5(d)(4), that an environmental impact statement or negative declaration and environmental impact appraisal need not be prepared in connection with the issuance of this amendment.
D.
Conclusion We have concluded, based on the consideraticns discussed above, that (1) because the amendment does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of accidents previously considered or a significant decrease in any safety margin, it does not involve a significant hazards consideration, (2 ) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, and (3) stch activities will be conducted in compliance with the Connission's regulations and the issuance of this amendment will not be inimical to the conmon defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Also, we reaffirm our conclusions as otherwise statec in our Safety Evaluation Report and its Supplements.
452 2 t!l