ML20141N111

Safety Evaluation Supporting Amend 31 to License R-28

ML20141N111
Person / Time
Site:	University of Michigan
Issue date:	02/24/1986
From:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:
Shared Package
ML20141N106	List: ML20141N105 ML20141N109 ML20141N111
References
NUDOCS 8603030592
Download: ML20141N111 (2)

Text

.. == asa

1. 'o

~,, UNITED STATES 5' o NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

$  ;$ WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555

%...../

SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT N0. 31 TO FACILITY LICENSE N0. R-28 UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN DOCKET N0.50-002 Introduction By letter dated December 2,1985, University of Michigan (UM) indicated that the position of " Supervisor of Reactor Operations" has been eliminated and that those duties and responsibilities have been assumed by the Assistant Reactor Manager.

Evaluation From a telephone conversation with the Reactor Manager on December 18, 1985, it was determined that the position of Supervisor of Reactor Operations was a vacant position to be filled in the near future and that the qualifications of the Assistant Reactor Manager are the same as for the Reactor Manager.

Approval was obtained from the FNR Reactor Manager to also include these qualifications for the Assistant Reactor Manager in the Technical Specifications 6.1(4). Accordingly 6.1(4) is changed to read, FNR Reactor Manager and Assistant Reactor Manager throughout. The contents of 6.1(4) remain unchanged.

Inasmuch as the Assistant Reactor Manager was already performing the functions of the Reactor Supervisor, there is no change to the functional responsibilities of reactor operations management.

The only change, therefore, is to eliminate from the organizational chart (Fioura 6.1) the reference to a " Supervisor of Reactor Operations".

PDR P

Environmental Consideration This amendment involves administrative changes only. Accordingly, the amendment 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 impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of this amendnent.

Conclusion As indicated above, this amendment involves the elimination of a presently vacant position in the reactor facility organization, but does not change the physical facility. The staff concludes, based on the considerations discussed

! above, that; (1) because the amendment does not involve a significant increase

in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated, or

create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated, or involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety, the amendment does not involve a significant hazards consideration, (2) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safet will not be endangered by the proposed activities, and (3) such y of the public activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations and the issuance of this amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or the health and safety of the public.

Principal Contributor: Harold Bernard

.. Dated: February 24, 1986 I

e

_ _ _ _ - _____..__.___________-.__m. . _ _ _ . _ _ . _ _ _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ - . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . - _ _ _ - _ _ _ . -