ML20153B342
| ML20153B342 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Arkansas Nuclear  |
| Issue date: | 11/13/1978 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20153B335 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7812010380 | |
| Download: ML20153B342 (2) | |
Text
[
c i O g
UNITED STATES y
NUCLEAR HEGULATORY COMMISSION a
g WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555
\\,,,* /
~
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENTS NOS. 37 AND 5 TO j
FACILITY OPERATING LICENSES NOS. DPR-51 AND NPF-6 ARKANSAS POWER & LIGHT COMPANY ARKANSAS NUCLEAR ONE, UNITS NOS. 1&2 I
DOCKETS NOS. 50-313 & 50-368 j
Introduction By letter dated September 22, 1978, supplemented by letter dated October 17, 1978, Arkansas Power and Light Company (the licensee or
~
AP&L) requested amendment of the Technical Specifications (TS),
Appendices A and B, appended to Facility Operating Licenses Nos.
DPR-51 and NPF-6 for Arkansas Nuclear One, Units Nos.1&2 (AN0-1&2).
The changes would reflect a change in the licensee's plant staff 3
organization structure and also would make, the ANO-1 Administrative Controls Section of the Environmental Technical Specifications (ETS) 4 (Appendix B) consistent with ANO-2.
Changes to the TS were also proposed which would modify the implementation schedule of future j
proposed changes and the responsibilities of the Plant Safety Committee.
i Evaluation i
We have reviewed the proposed changes to the ANO-l&2 Administrative Controls Sections of the TS.
The reorganized plant staff would combine the functions of operations and maintenance under the new l
position of Operations and Maintenance Manager, and the technical support activities under the new position of Engineering and Technical Support Manager.
The Operations and Maintenance Manager, Engineering and Technical Support Manager, and Plant Administration Manager would all report to the General Manager (currently Plant Manager). The Quality Control Supervisor would report directly to the General Manager.
New positions of Plant Analysis Superintendent, Plant Engineering Superintendent, and Fire Control and Safety Coordinator would be established. These changes would not reduce the technical resources of the plant staff and should provide better supervision and management 4
of the plant staff.
We conclude that the revised plant staff organization meets the NRC staff's position described in Regulatory Guide 1.33, " Quality Assurance Program Requirements (Operation)," does not decrease the margin of safety, and is acceptable.
. '18 l2 oloSBc>
d 3
m
{
3 i
i l l
We also find that the proposed change to the ANO-1 Administrative l
Controls of the ETS makes the plant ETS current and consistent between units and tfierefore conclude that it is acceptable.
j We have reviewed the proposed changes to the TS which would modify the implementation of future proposed changes and the responsibilities of the Plant Safety Comittee. We have discussed these proposed j
changes with the licensee and the licensee has requested that these changes be considered separately in another amendment. We have accepted this request, and the licensee has agreed to provide additional bases to support the proposed changes.
l Environmental Consideration We have determined that the amendments do not auth'orize a change in effluent types or total amounts nor an increase in power level 1
?
and will not result in any significant environmental impact. Having made this determination, we have further concluded that the amendments involve an action which is insignificant from the standpoint of environmental impact and, pursuant to 10 CFR 551.5(d)(4), that an environmental impact statement, or negative declaration and environ-mental in. pact appraisal need not be prepared in connection with the 3;
issuance of these amendments.
4 Conclusion We have concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that:
(1) because the amendments do not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of accidents previously considered and do not involve a significant decrease in a safety margin, the amendments do not involve a significant hazards consideration, (2) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, and (3) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations and the issuance of these amendmentswill not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public,
~
Dated:
November 13, 1978