ML20058L902
| ML20058L902 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 12/13/1993 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20058L895 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9312200060 | |
| Download: ML20058L902 (3) | |
Text
. [ "%
[-
4 UNITED STATES 3
T!
j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION f
WASHINGTON, o.C. 20E0001 s...../
1 SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO. 179 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-50 METROPOLITAN EDISON COMPANY JERSEY CENTRAL POWER & LIGHT COMPANY PENNSYLVANIA ELECTRIC COMPANY GPU NUCLEAR CORPORATION THREE MILE ISLAND NUCLEAR STATION. UNIT NO. 1 DOCKET NO. 50-289
1.0 BACKGROUND
By letter dated September 20, 1993, as supplemented on October 1, 1993, GPU Nuclear Corporation (GPUN/ licensee), submitted a request to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) for changes to the Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit No.1 (TMI-1) Technical Specifications (TS). The amendment revises the plant TS to reflect a partial GPU Nuclear reorganization to become effective when Three Mile Island, Unit 2 (TMI-2), enters the Post-Defueling Monitored Storage (PDMS) mode. This reorganization includes deleting TMI-2 as a Division and incorporating those functions and responsibilities required to maintain the PDMS condition and requirements into the current THI-1 Division to form a new combined organization named the TM1 Division.
In addition to the change associated with the PDMS-related reorganization, some obsolete organizational titles are updated. The October 1,1993, submittal provided clarifying and corrected TS pages which did not change the initial proposed no significant hazards consideration determination.
2.0 EVALUATION Following cleanup from the March 28, 1979, accident at THI-2, GPUN made a decision to place TMI-2 in a PDMS mode rather than either restore the plant to i
operation or decommission the plant. To coincide with establishing PDMS, GPUN will slightly alter the organization by combining the TM1-1 and THI-2 organizations into one organization. During recovery from the accident, and prior to authorizing restart of THI-l in 1985, the Commission went to extraordinary lengths to keep the cleanup at Unit 2 from affecting safe operation of Unit 1.
Therefore, a separate line organization was established for each unit, called the TMI-1 Division and the THI-2 Division, each unit having its own separate line management organization.
Each of the two i
Divisions had its own Vice President and Director reporting directly to the GPUN President and Chief Executive Officer. Once in the PDMS mode, there will i
be very little activity at TMI-2. Maintaining a separate organizational component solely for Unit 2 activities would not be justified from a cost standpoint and, in the opinion of the licensee, assigning responsibility of THI-2 activities to the current TMI-1 organization would not create unnecessary diversion for management and operation of TMI-1. During recent years, the licensee has combined the Radiological Control and 9312200060 931213 PDR ADOCK 05000289 P
Security groups from THI-1 and TMI-2 into single organizations. The licensee plans to assign one individual to the newly created position of PDMS Manager.
The PDMS Manager will be responsible for :ocrdinating all THI-2 activities and will report directly to the THI Director of Operations and Maintenance (one level below the TMI Site Director) and will have no responsibilities other than maintaining TMI-2 in the PDMS mode.
As part of the shift in responsibility for monitoring activities at THI-2 to THI-I personnel, the licensee has installed a remote alarm monitoring system that allows key THI-2 parameters to alarm in the THI-1 control room. Tb alarm windows (backlights) are color-coded in such a manner as to distinguish Unit I alarms from Unit 2 alarms. The THI-1 Shift Supervisor and his crew will maintain cognizance of the TMI-2 status including taking routine log readings and responding to alarms. The PDMS Manager will have only the responsibility of operation and maintenance activities at TMI-2 and will normally schedule these activities during daylight hours when he/she and i
his/her staff are onsite and available.
The minor additional responsibilities assumed by the TMI-l staff should not affect the organizational characteristics identified in the THI-l TS. Amendment No. 139 to the TMI-1 TS removed organization charts from the TS in lieu of maintaining general requirements that capture the essential aspects of the organizational structure that are defined by existing onsite and offsite organization charts.
The amendment proposed in the licensee's current request would not change the TS descriptions of the essential aspects of the organizational structure but would merely change certain job titles and reflect the additional TMI-2 responsibilities for the Site Director (Vice President - THI) and the Operations and Maintenance l
Director.
The staff has reviewed these proposed changes to the TMI-1 TS and finds that the i
safety significance of the changes is negligible and that the intent of P,egulatory Guide 1.8, " Personnel Selection and Training," has been preserved.
Therefore, the staff finds the proposed changes acceptable.
The staff also recognizes that the actual organizational changes will take place over a transitional period of several weeks. Therefore, effectiveness of the proposed amendment would not be until the end of the transition period when THI-2 has been declared to be in the PDMS mode and the Vice President - TMI has been delegated the full responsibility of the overall safe operation of both TMl-1 and TMI-2.
3.0 STATE CONSULTATION
In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the Pennsylvania State official l
was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendment. The State official had no comments.
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
The amendment relates to changes in recordkeeping, reporting, or administrative
)
procedures or requirements. Accordingly, the amendment meets the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(10).
Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b) no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of the amendment.
j i
i
i
5.0 CONCLUSION
The Commission has concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that:
(1) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations, and (3) the issuance of the amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributor:
R. W. Hernan Date:
December 13, 1993 t
4 i
i 1
i l
.. -