ML20067C014
| ML20067C014 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Arkansas Nuclear  |
| Issue date: | 02/04/1991 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20067C011 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9102110153 | |
| Download: ML20067C014 (3) | |
Text
-
nog f,,
UNITED STATES
[,., gh eg NUCLE AR REGULATORY COMMISSION 5y g
WASHWOTON, D. C 20$55
\\f*rff SAFETY EVALVATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLE % REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENi NOS ita AND 1u TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE N0!. DPR-51 AND NPF-6 QTERGYOPERATIOhS,INC.
ARKANSAS NUCLEAR ONE. UNIT NOS.1 AND 2 DOCKET NOS. 50-313 AND 50-368 INTRODUCTION By letter dated October 9, 1990 as supplemented January 21, 1991, Entergy Operations, Inc. (the licensee),requesteo amendments to the Technical Specifications (TS) appended to facility Operating Lir.ense Nos. DPR-51 and NPF-6 for Arkansas Nuclear One, Unit Nos. I and 2 (ANO-1&2).
The proposed amendments would revise ANO-1 and ANO-2 Technical Specifications to delete specific references to staff positions and Plant Safety Committee (PSC) compositions in each unit's Section 6.0, " Administrative Controls," in that specific titles of the PSC members are being deleted and replaced with a generic phrase. The proposed changes also reflect the realignment of certain management positions and delete the review of minor procedure changes that do not affect nuclear safety from the PSC responsibilities.
In addition, the proposed amendments include editorial changes.
The January 21, 1991, submittal contained clarifications only and did not alter the intent of the initial amendment request dated October 9, 1990.
EVALUATION Generic Letter 88-06, " Removal of Organization Charts from Technical Specification Administrative Control Requirements," provided guidance to licensees for the removal of ~ organization charts from the TS.
Removal of the position titles and reporting requirements in the onsite and offsite organization charts from the TS provides greater flexibility for licensees to implement changes in these organizations. Generic Letter 88-06 states that the organization charts in the TS may be replaced with general requirements that capture the essential aspects of the organizational structure and that the organization charts containing specific positions should be placed and maintained in the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR).
The NRC staff authorized removal of the onsite and offsite organization charts pursuant.to Generic Letter 88-06 in Amendments 112 and 87, respectively, for ANO-1 and ANO-2 to the facility Operating Licenses issued August 18, 1988.
However, the composition of the Plant Safety Committee (PSC) as presently specified'in TS 6.5.1.2 contains organization position titles.
Therefore, the flexibility intended to be achieved by removal of the organization charts from the TS is considerably decreased if the compositions of the PSC remain in the TC.
The licensee has proposed to change ANO-1 TS 6.5.1.2 and ANO-2 TS 6.5.1.2, "PSC Composition," by replacing the titles of PSC members with the 9102110153 910204 PDR ADOCK 05000313 P
l l
requirement that the PSC will be composed of eight members of the ANO onsite operating management organization at the superintendent level or above and a designated PSC Chairman. The PSC members and areas of responsibility will be designated in the Administrative Procedures. Changes to these procedures are made in accordance with 10 CFR 50.59, in addition, the makeup of the PSC will be from the superintendent level or above which will allow decisions to be made and approved at an appropriate level. The.HRC staff concludes that the proposed TS 6.5.1.2 for both units is acceptable because it defines the number and qualifications of the PSC members.
The licensee has proposed to change ANO-1 TS Sections 6.5.1.6.a and 6.8.2 and ANO-2 TS Sections 6.5.1.7.a and 6.8.2 to delete the review of minor procedure changes that do not affect nuclear safety from the PSC responsibilities. The proposed amendments will allow the PSC to review in greater detail safety significant items by requiring PSC review of only " intent" changes to procedures under TS Section 6.8.
Changes in intent is the same as that ct.rrently considered in TS Section 6.8.3.a.
Intent changes are those which meet one of the following criteria:
Involves a change in the PURPOSE of the procedure Involves a change in the SCOPE of the procedure Degrades the controls prescribed in the Administrative Procedures Involves a change that reduces the level of nuclear safety Involves a changa that degrades the acceptance criteria j
The process for determining intent changes is clearly defined in the licensee's procedure revision procedures and requires management review and approval of intent change designation prior to procedure approval.
For these reasons, the staff concludes that these changs are acceptable.
The licensee has also proposed to change ANO-1 and ANO-2 TS Section 6.8.3 to clarify that the procedural approval process is not a temporary change but an interim approval process for permanent procedure changes. This change does not modify or diminish the scope of the PSC interim or permanent procedure review responsibilities.
Additionally,(1)theANOsiteVicePresident'stitle,andcertainother position titles, are corrected throughout each units' Section 6.0 to reflec+.
the present organization, (2) the unit-specific Plant Manager title is addrd to the Director, Operations position title in TS subsections related to tne PSC to more accurately reflect the management reporting structure under the present ANO organizational t.lignment, (3) certain inconsistencies between the ANO-1 and ANO-2 TS are corrected where wording should be identical, and (4) a clarification to 'N0-2 TS Section 6.5.1.3 (formerly under 6.5.1.2) to ensure that nuclear software expertise is present when reviewing Core Protection Calculator (CPC) software. These are editorial and administrative changes, and therefore, are acceptable.
On the basis of its review, the staff concludes that the licensee has provided an acceptable evaluation of these items. Accordingly, the staff finds the proposed changes to be acceptable.
1
- r
. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION These amendments relate to changes in recordkeeping, reporting, or administrative procedures or requirements.
Accordingly, the amendments meet 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 these amendments.
CONCLUSION The staf f 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, and (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations, and the issuance of the amendments will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Date:
February 4, 1991 Principal Contributor:
S. Peterson n
,,. -