ML20101F882
| ML20101F882 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Davis Besse  |
| Issue date: | 12/16/1984 |
| From: | Crouse R TOLEDO EDISON CO. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20101F869 | List: |
| References | |
| TAC-56795, NUDOCS 8412270350 | |
| Download: ML20101F882 (4) | |
Text
,..
APPLICATION FOR AMENDMENT TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-3 FOR DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION
. UNIT NO. 1 Enclosed are forty-three (43) copies of the requested changes to the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Unit No. 1 Facility Operating License No. NPF-3, together with the Safety Evaluation for the requested change.
The proposed' change includes Section 6.4.1.
By /s/ R. P. Crouse Vice President, Nuclear
~
r
-Sworn and subscribed before me this 16th day of December, 1984.
/s/ Laurie A. Hinkle nee (Brudzinski)
Notary Public State of Ohio My Commission Expires May 16, 1986 SEAL O
i P
, ~,.,.
n" :..
Docket No. 50-346 i License No1 NPF-3' Serial No. 1109
- December. 16,-1984-
-Attachment-I.-
1 Changes to Davis-Besse Nuclear. Power Station Unit 1, Appendix A:
Technical Specifications 6.4.1.
'A.
. Time required to Implement. This change is to be effective upon NRC approval.
B.'
Reason for Change (Facility Change Rcquest 84-051).
' To add the. title " Nuclear Training Manager" to Section 6.4
- Training which-only contains " Position Title".
~C.
Safety Evaluation-(See Attached)
D.
Significant Hazard Consideration
'(See' Attached)'
s:
9 9
_.___m
e
[
SIGNIFICANT HAZARD CONSIDERATION ^
~ The latthched amendment request' to add the' title.of " Nuclear Training -
~
Manager":for direction of the training program at Davis-Besse does not
. represent a-significant hazard consideration.
- p cThe proposed change is to correct' an oversight when the standard technical Jspecification'was-adopted. The title " Nuclear Training Manager" was
-omitted. The Nuclear Training Manager is charged with the Nuclear training
. programs'at Toledo Edison. The amendment request reflects the organiza-~
tionaliresponsibilities for Nuclear Training. Therefore, tl:e. Nuclear-Training Manager title is added to Section 6.4.1.
-The Commission has provided guidance concerning the application of the standards in 10 CFR 50.92 by providing certain examples (48 FR 14870).
One of the examples of actions involving-no significant hazards considera-tions related to a purely administrative change to technical-specifications:
for example, a change to achieve consistency-throughout the technical-specifications, correction of an error,.or a change in nonmenclature (Example 1).
The-amendment request is an administrative change by adding the Position Title to Section 6.4.1-that was previously omitted. The addition of the Nuclear Training Manager title to the Technical Specification does not change any duties'or responsibilities but defines the responsibility for-the Nuclear training programs.
Based on the above information, this~ amendment request would not (1) involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated; or (2) create the possibility of a new or different kind of ' accident-from any accident previously evaluated;
-or (3) involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.
Therefore; based on the above, the requested license amendmen't does not-present a Significant Hazard.
ks b/1 i
7; SAFETY EVALUATION
- This' amendment request to change wording in the technical specifications, Section-6.4.'1,-to indicate that the Davis-Besse Unit 1 training program is under the direction of the Nuclear Training Manager.
The safety function of Section 6.4.1 is to ensure safe operation of the D1 avis-Besse Unit 1-facility by requiring that. an adequate training program is maintained.
J-The. proposed change is to correct an oversight when the standard technical specification was adopted. The title " Nuclear Training Manager" was omitted. -The safety function of the technical specification is not being' degraded by this change.
-It'is concluded that the change as proposed does not constitute an
.unreviewed safety question.
.