ML20114D564

TS Change Request NPF-38-126 to License NPF-38,revising Administrative Controls Section of TS by Modifying PORC Composition to Reflect Organizational Change

ML20114D564
Person / Time
Site:	Waterford
Issue date:	09/02/1992
From:	Barkhurst R ENTERGY OPERATIONS, INC.
To:	NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM)
Shared Package
ML20114D566	List: ML20114D564 ML20114D568
References
W3F192-0097, W3F192-97, NUDOCS 9209090158
Download: ML20114D564 (6)

Text

'

&_e__ Entargy ""' ' % a* ' " '" * -

l l

e Operations -

g

_ _ _ - . - . . . , - - - - - . - - - . ~ - - - -~ - - ~- - - - - - - - . - - . - - - - -

R. P. Barkhurst s..- s.

W3F192-0097 A4.05 QA Sent embe r 2, 1992 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

. ATTN: Document Cont ol Desk Washington, D.C. 20b55

Subject:

Waterford 3 SES Docket No. 50-382 License No. NPF-38 Technical Specification Change Request NPF-38-126 Gentlemen:

Entergy Operations, Incorporated hereby files an application for an amondment to the Waterford 3 Technical Specifications. The proposed change will revise the Administrative Controls Section of the Technical Specification by modifying PORC Composition to reflect a reorganization change.

Should you have any quentions or require additional information, pl. case contact Paul Caropino at (504) 739-6692.

Very truly yourn, y N-R.P. Barkhurst Vice President, Operations Waterford 3 RPB/PLC/ssf

Attachment:

Affidavit NPF-38-126 cc: R.D. Martin (NRC Region IV), D.L. Wigginton (NRC-NRR),

R.B. McGehee, N.S. Reynolds, NRC Resident Inspectors Office, Administrator Radiation Protection Division (State of-Louisiana), American Nuclear Insurers

\

040031 rM 9209090158 920902 PDR ADOCX'05000382 s\'V '\ i Y\

P PDR l

}

. i UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION In tho mattar of )

)

Entergy Operations, Incorporated ) Docket No. 50-382

-Waterford 3 Steam Electric Station ) 1 AFFIDAVIT R.P. Barkhurst,-being duly sworn, hereby deposes and says that he is Vice President Operations - Waterford 3 of Entergy Operations, Incorporated; that he is duly authorized to sign and file with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission the attached Technical-Specification Change Request NPF-38-126; that he is familiar with the content thereof; and that the matters. set forth therein are itrue-and correct to the best of his knowledge, information and belief.

N R.P.-Barkhurst

. Vice President Operations - Waterford 3 STATE OF. ICUISIANA )

) _- ss PARISH OF ST. CHARLES- )

Subscribed and sworn to before me, a Notary Public in and for the Parish and State above named this 2 *" day.of SEPT rm r3 c tL , 1992.

-, .r-

~ Cw l? . W lQ Notary Public My Commission expires /v' > r " - L / 7 3 .

DESCRIFFION AND SAFETY ANALYSIS OF PROPOSED C11ANGE NPF-38-126 This is a request to revise Section 6 (Administrative controls) of the Technical Specifications.

Existina SoecificatiRD See Attachment A Proposed Soecification See Attachment B Descrintion Technical Specification 6.5.1.2 provides the current Plant Operating Review Committee (PORC) Composition which includes the Plant Engineering Superintendent. Waterford 3 has eliminated this position and transferred the functional responsibilities to the Manager Technical Services who currently ser ves as PORC Chairman.- Previously five engineering groups reportcd to the Plant Engineering Superintendent who reported to the Manager Technical Services. Under the new organization the Plant Engineering groups will report directly to the Manager Technical Services. Waterford 3 will accommodate the vacant PORC position with one of the engineerirsg supervisors from one of the respective engineering groups. To allow for diversity, the membership title designating this position has been revised to read Management Knowledgeable in Engineering which is similar to the membership title for the Quality Assurance organization. As a result of this change the Plant Engineering Organization will be represented on PORC by the Manager Technical Services and an engineering supervisor. In addition the proposed revision of the Technical Specifications will eliminate a designated PORC Vice Chairman (previously the Plant Engineering Superintendent).

Either the Manager Technical Services or the Manager Operations and Maintenance will be PORC Chairman. In absence of the PORC Chairman the General Manager Plant Operations will appoint a temporary chairman. These proposed changes introduce no reduction in commitment, involving for the most part a change in functional responsibilities.

1

Safety Analysis The proposed change described above shall be deemed to involve a significant hazards consideration if there is a positive finding in any of the following areas:

1. Will operation of the facility in accordance with this proposed change involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of any accident previously evaluated?

Response: No The proposed change has no effect the assumptions contained in the safety analysis. The Technical Specifications which preserve the safety analysis assumptions are likewise unaffected by the proposed change. Therefore, the proposed change will not result in any in:rease in the probability or consequences of any accident previously 6 valuated.

2. Will operation of the facility in accordance with this proposed change create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?

Response: No The proposed change is administrative in nature and will not alter operation of the plant or effectiveness of PORC.

Therefore, the proposed change will not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.

3. Will operation of the facility in accordance 'sith the proposed change involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety?

Response: No The Waterford 3 safety margins are defined and ma3ntained by the Technical Specifications in Sections 2-5 which are unaffected by the proposed change. Therefore, the proposed

- change will not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.

The commission has provided guidance concerning the application of standards for determining whether a significant hazards consideration exists by providing certain examples (48 FR 14870) of amendments that are considered not likely to involve significant hazards considerations. This proposal most closely resembles example (1).

j' 2

l

i: = - -' .,

(i) A purely administrative change to technical specifications _(i.e., a change to achieve consistency throughout the technical specifications, correction of an error, cn: a change in nomenclature);

Safety and Sianificant Hazards Determination

" Based on the above safety analysis, it is concluded thatt (1) the proposed changes do not constitute a significant hazards consideration as defined by 10 CFR 50.92; and (2) there is a reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by the proposed changes; and (3) this action will not result in a condition that significantly alters the impact of the station on the environment as described in the NRC Final-Environmental Statement.

3

_ _ - ... . . . . . . . . . . - . . -- - - - , _ . . - ~ . . ~ .-,

4 t

9 9

9 Attachment A NPF-38-125

+

't E

i

!s k

. , - . -