ML20138N055

Safety Evaluation Supporting Amend 108 to License NPF-1

ML20138N055
Person / Time
Site:	Trojan File:Portland General Electric icon.png
Issue date:	12/05/1985
From:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:
Shared Package
ML20138N037	List: ML20138N034 ML20138N040 ML20138N049 ML20138N055
References
NUDOCS 8512230341
Download: ML20138N055 (3)

Text

_ _ __

i

^

/ ' UNITED STATES

[~*~8 -

o - NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION wasumorow, p. c.zosss 4

t- t I

\,,.....

ci Y _.

1; SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION t

RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO.108 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-1

!' PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY I THE CITY OF EUGENE, OREGON j PACIFIC POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY TROJAN NUCLEAR PLANT DOCKET NO. 50-344

1.0 INTRODUCTION

t.

By letters dated April 4, 1985, and August 26, 1985, Portland General Electric Company,~et al., (the licensee or PGE) requested an amendment to the Administrative Controls Section of Facility Op! rating License No. NPF-1 for

- operation of the Trojan Nuclear Plant in Columbia County, Oregon. The August 26 letter revised their original submittal concerning Technical Specification 6.5.2.2. This specification discusses the composition of the Trojan Nuclear Operations Board. PGE first requested deletion of the line clarifying that the members and the Chainnan of the Coard be designated by the Vice President Nuclear. Their August 26 letter revised the original submittal by replacing that line. Additionally, a line was added which defines the Chainnan's required experience. These changes clarify and better define the requirements of the specification. Below is a brief description and the staff's evaluation of the changes.

i

2.0 DESCRIPTION

AND EVALUATION Descriptio': Offsite Organizational Change i t The off-site organizational chart (Figure 6.2-1) is to be r'evised to i ,

reflect chenges in the PGE corporate structure and to update corporate ,

I officer po!ition titles.

Evaluation

i Our review of this requested change shows it only affects corporate organizational elements outside the nuclear department. The departments 4 affected do not appear to have decreased the ability of the corporate organization to adequately support the nuclear department and so this change is, therefore, acceptable.

Description:

On-site Organizational Change

! The on-site organizational chart (Figure 6.2-2) is to be revised to reflect the creation of the new Assistant Operations Supervisor position.

C512230341 PDR 851205 ADOCK 05000344

• PDR

D. -

t

[ .. ! .

1 Evaluation: -

Our review indicates that the creation and use of the new Assistant Operation Supervisor would pemit greater time for the Operations Supervisor to manage L the entire activities of the Operations Department. The evaluation of this J change indicates that the incorporation of this intemediate level of

,. . supervision would provide more direct, dedicated supervision of the shift

[ operations personnel. It is felt that the change should improve the l

- efficiency of the control room line operations and consequently the level of safety. -It is, therefore, acceptable.

p

Description:

Membership of Trojan Nuclear Operations Board (TN08)

(

i, Technical Specifications 6.5.2.2, 6.5.2.3 and 6.5.2.6 have been revised to delete the requirement for designated engineers and scientists as members of the Trojan Nuclear Operations Board (TNOB). The Vice L

President Nuclear will designate members from both within PGE and from outside the PGE organization. Also, members will be designated from p management as well as technical positions.

Evaluation:

Our reviews showed that the proposed change would provide added l flexibility to the Vice President Nuclear to bring outside expertise and other points-of-view to bear on safety issue reviews. In addition, the ability to appoint TNOB members from line management positions, as well l-as the technical staff, would increase management involvement in safety reviews and the inclusion of higher level decision making personnel could result in swifter resolution of safety problems. The Cha!rinan and membership experience and qualification requirements were not modified, therefore, each of the TNOP participants must have a high degree of p-nuclear experience and an academic degree in engineering or a scientific field. It is our opinion that the requested change will not decrease the level of safety and is in accordance with the acceptance criteria E expressed in SRP, Chapter 13.4. It is,'therefore, acceptable.

3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION

This amendment relates to changes in recordkeeping, reporting, or

! administrative procedures or requirements. Accordingly, this amendment i meets the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in

). 10 CFR 51.22(c)(10). Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b) no environmental E impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in

connection with the issuance of this amendment.

G

---a _- _ ---w- ,,._-,-, ---my,,-,w-w,nw-,e.,y,-..wm,,,,ww-w-g- ,7 .,m%..,9-wen,9.wwe ,,.y e,W*-'*veyT" N e-*-

s

.lI l i *

[ , .

i t i

4.0 CONCLUSION

I We have concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that (1) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the j

will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, such and (2) publi) activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations, l and the issuance of the amendment will not be inimical to the common i

defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.

Date: December 5, 1985 4 Principal Contributor:

I Peter W. McLaughlin i

f

'I

(

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