ML20132F083

Requests Assistance in Review of Encl Licensee 850628 Application for Amend to License DPR-50 Re Site Organization.Completion Date of 850731 & SALP Input for Each Safety Evaluation Performed Requested

ML20132F083
Person / Time
Site:	Three Mile Island
Issue date:	07/05/1985
From:	Thompson H Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Starostecki R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
References
TAC-57952, NUDOCS 8507180254
Download: ML20132F083 (1)

Text

,__- _ _

Docket No. 50-289 MEMORANDUM FOR: Richard W. Starostecki, Director Division of Reactor. Projects, Region I FROM: Hugh L. Thompson, Jr., Director Division of Licensing

SUBJECT:

TMI-1 PROPOSED CHANGE TO SITE ORGANIZATION Your assistance is requested in conducting a review of the enclosed submittal from GPU Nuclear Corporation dated May 28, 1985. The product expected as a result of your review is a completed safety evaluation. Your reviewers should use the Standard Review Plan (SRP) and Standard Technical Specifications (STS) as guidance in determining acceptance criteria, recognizing, of course, that, for operating reactors, the criteria in these documents are not requirements.

In accordance with NRR Office Letter No. 44, each safety evaluation performed by a technical division shall have a separate SALP input provided. For purposes of these reviews, the regional personnel involved are considered part of the technical divisions. Therefore we are requesting that your forwarding memorandum contain a SALP input for each safety evaluation performed.

Work for this review effort should be charged under TAC 57952. The requested completion date is July 31, 1985. Please notify me as soon as possible if this completion date is acceptable. Any contact with the licensee on this review effort or any additional information deemed necessary should be obtained through the NRR project manager. The project manager for this plant is John Thoma and he can be reached at 492-8213(FTS).

01 v ..L . , .. m y Frank J. Mira611a Hugh L. Thompson, Jr., Director h'DivisionofLicensing,NRR cc w/encloure:

J. Thoma DISTLT RIITTON D. Haverkamp 'ocketFile]

J. Carter RB#4 Rdg NRC PDR

Contact:

Memo File J. O. Thoma FTS 492-8213 ORB #4:DL #4:DL AD: :DL D:D JT3enig;cf < Gla'n s Tho n 7/g/85 4 7/D/85 7/3/85 8507180254 850705 PDR ADOCK 05000289 P PDR

GPU Nuclear Corporation Nuclear  :: em;a:t/*o Middletown, Pennsylvania 17o57 0191 717 944 7621 May 28, 1985 TELEX 84 2386 Writer's Direct Dial Number:

5211-85-2089 Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Attn: John F. Stolz, Chief Operating Reactors Branch No. 4 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555

Dear Mr.' Stolz:

~ '

bree Mile Island Nuclear Station, l' nit I. (TMI-1)

Operating License No. 'TrR-50 Docket No. 50-289 Technical Specification Change Request No. 144 Enclosed are three originals and forty confortned copies of Technical ,

Specification Change Request No. 144.

Also enclosed is one signed copy of the Certificate of Service for this request to the chief executives of the township and county in which the facility is located, as well as the Bureau of Radiation Protection.

Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.91(a)(1), we enclose our analyses, using the standards in 10 CFR 50.92 of significant hazards considerations. As stated above, pursuant to 10 CFR 50.91(a) of the regulations, we have provided a copy of

. this letter, the proposed change in Technical Specifications, and our analyses of significant hazards considerations to Thomas Gerusky, the designated representative of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.

Pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 170.21, enclosed is a check for $150.00 as payment of the fee associated with Technical Specification Change Request No. 144.

Sincerely,

/

f. D. Hu ill Director. THI-1 HDH/JGB/spb

Enclosures:

1) Technical Specification Change Request No. 144

2) Certificate of Service for Technical Specification Change Request No. 114

3) Check No. 00173178 cc: J. Thoma GPU Nuclear Corporation is a subsidiary of the General Public Utilities Corporation 0 SA N h ^lJ.~

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

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION IN THE MATTER OF CENSENb.DPR 0 GPU NUCLEAR CORPORATION This is to certihy that a copy of Technical Specification Change Request No.144 to Appendix A of he Operating License for Three Mile Island Nuclear 3

Station Unit 1. has, on the date given below, been filed with executives of Londonderry Township, Dauphin County, Pennsylvania; Dauphin County. .

Pennsylvania; and the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources.

Bureau of Radiation Protection, by deposit in the United States mail, _g addressed as follows:

.. a, i

Mr. Jay H. Kopp, Chairman Mr. John E. Minnich, Chairman Board of Supervisors of Board of County Commissioners of Dauphin County Londonderry Township R. D. fl. Geyers Church Road Dauphin County Courthouse Middletown, PA 17057 Harrisburg, PA 17120 Mr. Thomas Gerusky, Director i PA. Dept. of Environmental Resources 1 Bureau of Radiation Protection P.O. Box 2063 Harrisburg, PA 17120 i

GPU NUCLEAR CORPORATION

< BY

Direct ~f".

o TMI-1 DATE: May 28, 1985 a

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

e.

METROPOLITAN EDISON COMPANY JERSEY CENTRAL POWER & LIGHT COMPANY AND PENNSYLVANIA ELECTRIC COMPANY THREE MILE ISLAND NUCLEAR STATION, UNIT 1 Operating License No. DPR-50

. Docket No. 50-289

, Technical Specification Change Request No.144 ,

Th'is Technical Specification Change Request is submitted in support of Licensee's request to change Appendix A to Operating License No. DPR-50 for Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit 1. As a part of this request, proposed replacement pages for Appendix A are also included.

GPU NUCLEAR CORPORATION BY Director, TMI-1 Sworn and Subscribed to before me this inuck, day of h . r 1985.

%.sn %ns4h..v '

Nothy Pub'ic

,og an eau +Jw 'te vggtpost 9000 OAUPHl= C004"

.,. ;)yyggtl% ltPICl3 JUNI 17 ISIlh y,,,, ,. p,eg.I.39a l ' "'A'.*R *I N 18M

_,- m - . - , _ _ _. - , . _ - _ _ _ -_--_m. . , , , , - ,

., I. Technical Specification Change Request No. 144 The Licensee requests that the revised Figure 6-2 replace the existing i

Figure 6-2 in the TMI-1 Technical Specifications.

II. Reason for Change ~

This TSCR is requested due to a change in the Plant Engineering Department to improve the organizational structure. The change shows the addition of " Manager (s). Plant Engineering" positions reporting to the Plant Engineering Director. Current plans are for two such positions, with several of the Lead Engineers reporting to one of the two Managers.

The " Chemistry Supervisor" block title has been changed to " Staff Chemist" to reflect the current title for this position. The Lead Nuclear Engineer and the Staff Chemist continue to report directly to the Plant,, Engineering Director.

III. Safety Evaluation Justifying Change .

i~ The changes are administrative changes to assure better management of ..

the engineering workload. The Plant Engineering Organization maintains the same number of disciplines, experience, and educational requirements.

This change therefore, does not reduce the margin of safety provided by the Technical Specifications.

IV. No Significant Hazards Consideration These proposed changes are similar to Example 11 of the " Amendments Not Likely to Involve Significant Hazards Considerations" from Federal Register Vol. 48, No. 67 at 14870 on April 6,1983.

The proposed Amendment, which is similar to the suggested format in the Standard Technical Specifications, does not affect plant design or operation, and does not involve modifications to plant equipment or changes that would affect plant safety analyses. The organization change assures that an adequate number of disciplines with sufff:1ent education and experience are available to provide the on-site

engineering support necessary to fMI-1 operations.

This TSCR constitutes additional management control through an improved 1

organizational structure of the Plant Engineering Department.

Therefore, the proposed amendment involves no significant hazards considerations in that it does not:

l .

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

- - _ __ ..= ... . . __ . .- - - _.

o . .

1) Involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences

.. of an accident previously evaluated.

2) Create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.

3) Involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. -

V. Implementation It is requested that the Amendment authorizing this change become effective upon issuance.

g g d e 9

e e

O

+%

_ - - - , .- , _ , - . - _-. , . - -- .-w , , , . _ y, . --,,-___ ,_:-.+ , -,- ,- - -. - -, 9_

• _ _- - . . __y_- - .,,. ,.- _ _,. - -

- . - . . - - . - - - . ~ . . - - . - -.- . . . -.. . .

---

.-g. - - _ _ - - - , . - - _ _ - . - - . . .

e #

8 e e N

d g e iel

! 8=8 n=

8 Ill i .

Ill ill

_ 18 .

gl i a

,e i n, sli ,

Ii lil 111 lil  !

il a 5

lis 1

~

m ll lll ill s.

t- E- 8 3

, -m ,

l _

l _ Is _ e

? E s!!

I Il i _

i 11 11 F-t 7 Ill il ,

,,1 ls I s I

8 l 8 lh dl

! - stil si n d _ . . L..... L . . .l . .J l ill 8

11 ill lll ,

., . _ , . . _ - .