ML20137W125
| ML20137W125 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | FitzPatrick  |
| Issue date: | 10/01/1985 |
| From: | POWER AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK (NEW YORK |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20137W061 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8510040226 | |
| Download: ML20137W125 (5) | |
Text
.
.=
ATTACHMENT I
. Proposed Technical Specification Changes Related to the Plant Operating Review Committee I
4 1
i New York Power Authority i
James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant i
Docket No. 50-333 DPR-59 dated 8510040226 851001 PDR ADOCK 05000333 PDR p
~.
.4 6.
Yn addition to items 1,-2 & 3 above, two additional operators shall be readily available on site whenever the reactor is in other than cold shutdown. During cold shutdown, an additional operator shall be readily available on site.
7.
An individual qualified in radiation protection procedures shall be on site when fuelJis in the reactor.
8.
'In the event of illness or absenteetsm, up to two (2) hours is allowed to restore the shift crew or fire-brigade to normal complement..
9.
A Fire Brigade of five (5) or more members shall be maintained on site at all times.
This' excludes two (2) members of the minimum shift crew necessary for safe shutdown and any personnel required for other essential functions during a fire emergency.
- 10. A' Shif t Technical Advisor shall be on site and readily available to the control room except during the cold shutdown or refuel mode.
6.3 PLANT STAFF QUALIFICATIONS The minimum qualifications with regard to educational background and experience for plant staff positions shown in Fig. 6.2.1 shall meet or exceed the minimum qualifications of Regulatory Guide 1.8, September 1975 and the Shift Technical Advisor who shall have a bachelor's degree or equivalent in a scientific or engineering discipline with specific training in plant design, and response and analysis of the plant for transients and accidents. Any deviations will be justified to the NRC prior to an individual's filling of one of these positions.
6.4 RETRAINING AND REPLACEMENT TRAINING A training program shall be maintained under the direction of the Training Coordinator to assure overall proficiency of the plant staff organization.
It shall consist of both retraining and replacement training and shall meet or exceed the minimum requirements of Section 5.5 of ANSI NI8.1-1971.~
The retraining program shall not exceed periods two years in length with a curriculum designed to meet or exceed the requalification requirements of 10 CFR 55, Appendix A.
In addition fire brigade training shall meet or exceed the requirements of NFPA 27-1975, except for Fire Brigade training sessions which shall be held at least quarterly. The effective date for implementation of fire brigade training is March 17, 1978.
6.5 REVIEW AND AUDIT Two separate groups for plant operations have been constituted. One of these, the Plant Operating Review Committee (PORC), is an onsite review group. The other is an independent review and audit group, the offsite Safety Review Committee (SRC).
3/, p Amendment No.
248
.P -
g.
ATTACHMENT II Proposed Technical Specification Change Related to the Plant Operating Review Committee Safety Evaluation 1
e A
New York Power huthority James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant Docket No. 50-333 DPR-59 dated
I.
Description of the Proposed Chance The proposed change to the FitzPatrick Technical Specifications clarifies the Plant Operating Review Committee (PORC).
Specifically, the following change is.being proposed:
On page 248, revise Section 6.5 to read, "6.5 REVIEW AND AUDIT Two separate groups for the support of plant operations have been constituted.
One of these, the Plant Operating Review Committee (PORC), is an onsite review group.
The other is an independent review and audit group, the offsite Safety Review Committee (SRC)."
All other changes on page 248 are corrections of typographical errors.
II.
Purpose of the Proposed Chance The proposed revision reflects current organization and the licensing basis of the Plant.
The existing wording implies that.PORC performs audits.
The wording change is meant to clarify that PORC reviews, while the Safety Review Committee (SRC) both reviews and performs audits.
The proposed revision does not change either PORC or SRC function.
III. Impact of the Proposed Chance The proposed change is a clarification of the existing organization.
It is purely an administrative change, and cannot have any impact on plant safety.
The proposed change would not, therefore, involve significant hazards considerations since it would not:
(1)-involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated, because it is only a clarification; (2) create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated, because it
-is strictly editorial in nature; or (3) involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety, because it does not propose any change in either PORC or SRC functions.
IV.
Implementation of the Proposed Chance The change, as proposed, does not adversely impact the ALARA, Security or Fire Protection programs at FitzPatrick, nor does it impact the environment.
V.
Conclusion The change, as proposed, does not constitute an unreviewed safety question as defined'in 10 CFR 50.59, that is, it (a) will not increase the probability or the consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety as evaluated previously in the Safety Analysis Report (SAR); (b)~
will not increase the possibility of an accident or malfunction of a type other than that evaluated previously in the SAR: (c) will not reduce the margin of safety as defined in the basis for any Technical Specification; (d) does not constitute an unreviewed safety question; and (e) involves no significant hazards considerations, as defined in 10 CFR 50.92.
VI.
Reference 1.
James A.
FitzPatrick FSAR, Section 13.10.1.1 0
\\