ML20050B639
| ML20050B639 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Calvert Cliffs  |
| Issue date: | 03/09/1982 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20050B636 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8204070027 | |
| Download: ML20050B639 (2) | |
Text
__
p rec g
'k-
-UNITED STATES
[g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g f g(/j/
j WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555
\\.%(
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT NOS. 68 AND 50_ TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NOS. DPR-53 AND DPR-69 BALTIMORE GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY CALVERT CLIFFS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, UNIT NOS. 1 AND 2 DOCKET NOS. 50-317 AND 50-318 Introduction By application dated January 22, 1982, the Baltimore Gas and Electric Company requested changes to the Technical Specifications (TS) for Calvert Cliffs.
The proposed changes in the TS reflect the recent management reorganization at Baltimore Gas and Electric Company (BG&E).
In addition, Appendix A TS are revised to incorporate shift staffing requirements which conform to NUREG-0737, Item I. A.1.3.2.
requirements relating
." Shift manning, minimum shift crew" and reporting.,d challenges in accordance to pressuri:et safety and relief valve failures an with NUREG-073), Item II.K.3.3, " Reporting Safety Valve and Relief Valve-failures and challenges."
In the course of reviewing the above changes to the TS, we have found it nccessary to make certain changes in order to meet our requirements.
The licensee has reviewed and concurred in these changes.
Discussion and Evaluation The requirements of Appendix A TS 6.2.1 specify the Cal. vert Cliffs off-site organization for facility management and technical support.
In a similar manner, Appendix B TS 5.2 specifies the plant and corporate organi:ation relative to environmental matters at Calvert Cliffs. As a result of a recent reorganization at BG&E, Appendix A TS 6.2.1 and Appen-dix B TS 5.2 are amended by providing updated organization charts which reflect these recent changes.
In addition, the shift staffing require-ments of Appendix A TS 6.2.2a are amended to be consistent with the requirements of NUREG-0737 Item I. A.1.3.2.
The change results in the requirement for an additional licensed (0L) operator, resulting in a total-of three operators on shift duty, when one unit is in oceration while the other unit is shut down.
It is our intent that only two of the three OLs be required to be in the control room at any given time under the above referenced conditions. The shift staffing requirements, specified when one unit is in operation with the second unit defueled are deleted consistent with NUREG-0737, Item I. A.3.2.
Accordingly, we conclude that the shift staffing requirements for Calvert Cliffs are consistent with NUREG-0737 Item I.A.3.2.
Since the remaining part of Item I. A.1.3, " Limiting Overtime" (Item I. A.1.3.1) was approved for Calvert Cliffs via NRC letter dated November 3,1981, our review of Item I. A.1.3 is complete for Calvert Cliffs Units 1 and 2.
With regard to reporting requirements, the licensee has agreed to report challenges to the pressurizer safety and relief valves, as part of their annual report. This requirement is incorporated in TS 6.9.1.5.c.
This change satisfies our requirements.concerning'NUREG-0737 Item II.K.3.3.
8204070027 820309 PDR ADOCK 05000317 P
e
- e Environmental Consideration We have determined that the amendments do not authorize a change in effluent types or total amounts nor an increase in power level and dill not result in any significant environmental impact. Having made this determination, we have further concluded that the amendments involve an action which is insignificant from the standpoint of environmental impact and, pursuant to 10 CFR $51.5(d)(4), that an' environmental impact statement or negative declaration and environ-mental impact appraisal need not be prepared in connection with the issuance of t.hese amendments.
Conclusion We have concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that:
(1) because the amendments do not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of accidents previously considered and do not involve a significant decrease in a safety margin, the amendments do 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) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's reg 61ations and the issuance of these amendments will not be inimical to the common defense and security cr to the health and safety of the public.
Date: March 9, 1982 Principal Contributor:
Da'e Jaffe v
a e