ML20065C409
| ML20065C409 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | McGuire  |
| Issue date: | 09/14/1982 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20065C408 | List: |
| References | |
| TAC-48049, NUDOCS 8209230399 | |
| Download: ML20065C409 (2) | |
Text
%
~
V y
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO NIENDiiENT NO. 16 TO LICENSE NPF-9 DUKE POWER COMPANY INTRODUCTION On July 26, 1982, the Duke Power Company announced a series of changes in the company's stean production departcent. According to the announcement the reorgan-ization which establishes new departments along functional lines, will enable nanagers to concentrate on specific areas of operations that should bring improved production and reliability, ef ficiency. To reflect these changes Duke Power Company proposed several changes, by letter dated July 30, 1982, to Section 6 of the Tech-nical Specifications for McGuire Unit 1.
The proposed changes to Section 6 would revise Figure 6.1-2 to show the newly forned Nuclear Production Department and revise Figure 6.1-1 to show an in-line Operating Engineer reporting to the Operat-ing Superintendent.
EVALUATION Establishnent of the Nuclear Production Departnent The current ficGuire Technical Specifications show the nuclear station nanager report -
ing to the Manager Nuclear Production who in turn reports to the Vice President, Stean Production. The proposed reorganization divides the functions of the Vice President, Stean Production into three positions: Vice President, Nuclear Production; Vice President, Fossil Production; and Vice President, Production Support. Reporting to the Vice President, Nuclear Production will be a General Manager, Nuclear Stations to whon the Nuclear Station Managers will report. Also reporting to the Vice Presi-dent, Nuclear Production will be a itanager Nuclear Reliability Assurance, flanager Nuclear Safety Assurance, Manager Nuclear Operation, fianager Nuclear Maintenance, Manager Nuclear Technical Services, Nanager Nuclear Engineering Services, Manager Nuclear Administrative Services and Manager Nuclear General Services.
Based on our evaluation, we consider that these proposed changes provide for better integration of those functions needed to support the operation of the nuclear station under a single high level corporate official and are acceptable. This is shown in the revised Technical Specifications Figure 6.1-2 and nunerous text changes.
Establishnent of an In-Lino Operatino Engineer The current Technical Specifications show the Shift Supervisors reporting directly to the Operating Superintendent, who neets the qualification requirements for Oper-ations Manager of Section 4.2.2 of ANSI /ANS 3.1-1978, "Anerican National Standards fr e hinctinn in<f Trainino of Mnelnar pnuor Dinnt Portonnnl." with an Onoratinn FJ giner as a st aff assistant to the Ope '.ating Superi ntendent. Tr e licensee p' ans OFFICE y 8209230399 820914 PDR ADOCK 05000369 P
PDR t
t I
OFFICIAL RECORD COPY usaeon.n - m..so NRC FORM M OG-80) NRCM 0ao
m%
p Q
, to upgrade the qualifications of the Shift Operating Engineer to that of the Oper-ationis f4anager of Section 4.2.2 of AtlSI/ANS 3.1-1978, and place the Shift Operatio19 Engineer in a line position between the Shift Supervisors and the Operating Super-intendent. This organization is reflected in revised Technical Specification Figure 6.1-1.
The licensee proposes to alter the qualification requirenents for the Oper-ating Superintendent such that he nust hold or have held a senior license on the unit.
Based on our evaluation, we find that the proposed organizational change is accept-able since the Shift Operating Engineer will meet the qualification requireuents for the individual performing the function of Operations Manager of Section 4.2.2 of ANSI /ANS 3.1-1978 and neets the staff position of Revision 1 to Regulatory Guide 1.8.
ENVIRONMEflTAL CONSIDERATION lle have deternined that the amendment does not authorize a change in effluent types or total anounts nor an increase in power level and will not result in any signif-icant environmental inpact. Having nade this deten11 nation, we have further con-cluded that the accodnent involves an action which is insignificant frou the stand-point of envirorwiental inpact und, pursuant to 10 CFR Section 51.5(d)(4), that an environnental inpact statenent or negative declaration and envirornental impact appraisal need not be prepared in connection with the issuance of this anendnent.
C0flCLUSI0tl tie have concluded, based on the consideration discussed above, that: (1) because the anendment does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of accidents previously considered, does not create the possibility of an accident of a type different froa any evaluated previously, and does not involve a significant decrease in a safety nargin, the anendment does not involve a significant hazards consideration (2) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the pubitc will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, and (3) such l
activities will be conducted in compliance with the Conmission's regulations and the issuance of this anendment will not be inimical to the colonn defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Date: September 14, 1982 l
Principal Contributors: Fred A11enspach, Licensee Qualification Branch, DHFS Ralph A. Birkel, Licensing Hranch No. 4, DL ornce) sunucur) oare )
mc rosu ais oo-coj uscu cao OFFICIAL RECORD COPY usa mi-m m