ML20077R383
| ML20077R383 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Beaver Valley |
| Issue date: | 09/06/1983 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20077R382 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8309200058 | |
| Download: ML20077R383 (4) | |
Text
. - - - -
I
!pd secg S,
UNITED STATES
[ *.. 77 j NUCLEAR REGULATORY CCMMISSION wAsmNoToN, D. C. 20555
'*/
September 6, 1983 SAFETY EVALUATICN BY THE OFFICE OF MUCLEAR REACTCR REGL'LATION RELATED TO AMENDMENY NO.7 0 ToTACILITY OPERATING LICENSE N0. CPR-66
^ l' DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY OHIO EDISOff COMPANY PEMNSYLVANIA POWER CCMPAflY BFAVER VALCEY POWER STATION, UtlIT NO. 1 DOCKET NO. 50-334 By letter dated November 23, 1982 (amended by letter dated December 15, 1982), the licensee requested a charige to the Beaver Valley Unit 1 Technical Specifications which would allow operation of the unit with two SR0s and one RO on shift, in lieu of the existing' requirement for two SR0s and two R0s on shift.
The request was prompted by a present shortage of licensed operators at the facility, which is expected to continue through most of 1983.
The original Technical Specifications for Beaver Valley Unit I required one SR0 and two R0s on shift during plant operation.
However, in response to the staffing guidance of NUREG-0737, the licensee amended the Technical Specifications (Amendment 39, February 11,1981) to require two SR0s and two R0s on shift. 'Since issuance of Amendment 39, the licensee has experienced abnormally high losses of licensed operators such that the present plant staff includes only nine R0s and ten SR0s available for sh.ift work.
This limited number of operators does not allow for full shift coverage, while still providing for operator requalification training and absences due to sickness, vacation, etc., without extensive use of overtime.
Decreasing the number of R0s required on shift from two to one would decrease the overtime L= ^ j requirements.
?
At the present time, the staffing levels of NUREG-0737 are for guidance only.
.I~
8309200058 830906 y
DR ADOCK 0500033
}
2 However, a staffing rule is now being issued which will codify the NUREG-0737 staffing levels as a requirement.
The effective date of the rule is January 1,1984 Until the rule becomes effective, a licensee may continue to operate with the existing licensed operator staff, as required by the Technical Specifications.
The licensee now has six classes of operator trainees in progress, five for potential new Beaver Valley operators, and one special class to provide the operators from the Shippingport plant with the requisite skills and knowledge of operating a connercial nuclear plant.
A total of 58 RO candidates and 67 SRO candidates are in training, but significant output from this training program is not expected until late-1983.
The licensee also has modified the pay policy for licensed operators which seems to' bave stopped the abnormally high attrition rate experienced since February 1980(18 licensed operators left,the company during this period, but only one since the new pay policy wentintoeffect).
The licensee has used four licensed operators on each shift since Beaver Valley Unit 1 began operation, although the Technical Specifications required only three licensed operators (one SRO and two R0s).
The licensee has required a shift supervisor (SRO), a shift foreman (SRO), a control operator (RO), and a plant operator (RO).
Either the shift foreman or the shift l
supervisor has been required to be in the control room at all times.
The plant operator has taken care of activities in the control room not involved with reactivity control, e.g., logs, readings, auxiliary equipment start-up and surveillance testing.
There is no NRC requirement that the individual handling these plant operator duties be licensed.
If the requested Technical Specification change is granted, the licensee proposes to use an experienced auxiliary operator to fill the plant operator position on those occasions when there were only three licensed personnel available on shift.
The normal operating mode still would be with four licensed operators.
When an auxiliary operator is used in the plant operator position, an additional auxiliary operator would be assigned to the shift, thus maintaining the same total number of licensed and unlicensed operators.
3-The licensee's proposal was discussed during a meeting at the Beaver Valley Power Station on February 15, 1983.
During the meeting, the licensee agreed to conduct some trial shift operations with the licensed plant operator standing aside while his duties were performed by an auxiliary operator.
By letter dated April 18, 1983, the licensee reported the successful conduct of these trials. The non-licensed operators, after some. experience, were able to satisfactorily perform their limited duties under the supervision of licensed personnel. The licensee now has one non-licensed operator per shift trained to perform the routine peripheral control room duties of the normally licensed plant operator.
Granting this Technical Specification change request would allow Beaver Valley Unit 1 to revert to the previous requirement to have three licensed operators on shift. However, two of three operators would now be SR0 qualified instead of one of the three operators as existed prior to issuance of Amendment 39.
Further, granting this change would place Beaver Valley in the same status as other single-unit facilities that still are operating with a requirement for only three licensed operators per shift.
We conclude that since there is now no rule that a licensee have four licensed operators per shift, since other licensees are still operating with only three licensed operators per shift, and since the requested change will allow this licensee to avoid much of the overtime that has been required in the recent past, this change request should be granted.
The net effect of this change will be to reduce the total number of licensed operators available on shift which will have some deleterious, but unquantifiable, effect on plant safety.
However, it will also allow the licensee to staff each shift with personnel who have not been working extensive overtime.
Thus, while a shift may have one less licensed reactor
'perator assigned, the three operators that are assigned should be more 4
rested and mentally alert and better able to cope with off-normal events as they occur.
The fourth, normally licensed position will be filled by an experienced auxiliary operator who has been trained to conduct limi.ted control room duties not involving reactivity manipulation under the supervision of a licensed operator.
Based on the above, we have concluded that the requested Technical Specifi-cation change may be approved without undue risk to the health and safety of the public.
Environmental Consideration We have determined that the amendment does not authorize a change in effluent types or total amounts nor an increase ijn power level and will not result in any significant environmental impact.
Hay 1ng made this determination, we have further concluded that the amendment involves an action which is insig-nificant from the standpoint of environmental impact and, pursuant to CFR 551.5(d)(4), that an environmental impact appraisal need not be prepared in connection with the issuance of this amendment.
Conclusion We have 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 this amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Dated:
September 6,1983 princioal Contributor:
L. Crocker
_. _.