ML20005F366
| ML20005F366 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Brunswick  |
| Issue date: | 01/03/1990 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20005F359 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9001160218 | |
| Download: ML20005F366 (5) | |
Text
_
e i
, /.p3 *%9'o UNITED STATES E'
~g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
+
n y
- I wAswiwotow o.c.20sss
%,...../
i SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTIhG AMENDMENT NO.138 TO FACILITY OPERATINC LICENSE NO. OPR-71 j
AND AMENDRENT NO.170 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-62 CAP,0 LINA POWER & LIGHT COMPAtlY, et al.
BRUNSWICK STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT. UNITS 1 AND 2 i
00CKE1 hCS. 50-325 AND 50-324 l
1.0 1,NTPCLUCT10N By letters dated April 28, 1969 and November 16, 1989, Carolina Power &
Light Company submitted requests for changes to the Brunswick Steam Electric Plant, Units 1 and 2 Tt.chnical Specificaticos (TS). The proposed changes would:
(1)deletetheorganizatiencharts(Figures 6.2.1-1, 6.2.2 1, and 6.2.2.-1) from the plant and replace then. with a narrative description of the offsite anc onsite organizationi functional requirements in TS and (2) remove Section 6.2.1 and the plant operations staff qualifications in Section 6.2.2.
References to Figures 6.2.1-1, 6.2.2-1 and 6.2.2-0 from TS Sections 6.2.1, 6.2.2 and 6.3.
Inaddition}theproposedchanges include the following orgarization changes:
1 Pevise TS Section 6.0, Administrative Controls, to reflect changes in organitation names and individual titles; (these ch6nges were the result of a recent licensee reorganization and other managenent changes), and (2) revise TS Section 6.5.4.9 to meet the recuirements of 10 CFR 50.72 and 10 CFR 50.73.
Guidance for the deletion of organization charts from the TS was provided to the licensee by Generic Letter 88-06, dated March 22, 1988.
I 2.0 D ALUATION Consistent with the guidance provided in the Standard Technical Specifica-tions, Specificaticns 6.2.1 and 6.2.2 of the administrative control require-ments have referenced offsite and onsite organization charts that are i
provided as figures in these sections. On a plant specific basis, these l
organization charts have been provided by applicants and included in the TS issued with the operating license.
Subsequent restructuring of either the offsite or onsite organizations has required licensees to submit a l
license amendment for NRC approval to reflect the desired changes in these l
organizations. As a consequence, organizational changes have necessitated j-the need to request an amendnent of the operating license.
l.
e 9001160218 900103y4 DR ADOCK O 1
,b w e
2 Because of these limitations on organizational structure, the nuclear industry has highlighted this as an area for improvement in the TS.
Carolina Power 8 Light Company proposed changes to remove organization charts from the Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant TS under the leaa-plant concept that included the endorsement of the proposeo changes by the Westinghouse Owners Group.
In its review of the Shearon Harris proposal, the staff concluded that most of the essential elements of offsite and onsite organization charts are captured by other regulatory requirements, notably, Appendix B to 10 CFR Part 50.
However, there are aspects of the orgenizational structure that are important to ensure that the adminis-trative control requirements of 10 CFR 50.36 would be met and that would not be retained with the removal of the organizational charts.
The applicable regulatory requirements are those administrative controls that are necessary to ensure safe operation of the facility. Therefore, those aspects of
. organization charts for Shearon Harris that were essential for conformance with regulatory requirements were added (1) to Specification 6.2.1 to define functional requirements for the offsite and onsite organizations and (2) to Specification 6.2.2 to define qualification requirements of the unit staff.
By letter dated January 27, 1988, the staff issued Amendment No. 3 to Facility Operating License NPF-63 for the Shearon Parris Nuclear Power Plant that incorporated these changes into their b.
Subsequently, the staff developed guidance on an acceptable format for license amendment requests to remove the organization charts from TS. Generic Letter 88-06 provided this guidance to all power reactor licensees.
The licensee's proposed changes to its TS are in accordance with the guidance provided by Generic Letter 88-06 and address the items listed below.
(1) Specifications 6.2.1, 6.2.2 and 6.3 were revised to delete the references to Figure 6.2.1-1, 6.2.2-1 and 6.2.2-2. that were removed from the TS.
(2) Functional requirements of the offsite and onsite organizations were defined and added to Specification 6.2.1, and they are consistent with the guidance provided in Generic Letter 88-06. The specification notes that implenentation of these requirements is being updated in the plant FSAR as required by 10 CFR 50.71(e).
(3) The senior reactor operator and reactor operator license qualified positions of the unit staff were added to Specification 6.2.2.
This
' requirement was not identified on the organization chart; however, the licensee is edding this requirement to TS following the removal of the organization chart for the operations unit staff.
(4) Consistent with requirements to document the offsite and onsite organization relationships in the form of organization charts, the licensee has confirmed that this documentation has been designated for inclusion in the next update of the FSAR and QA program.
a
r 3
m (5) Specification 6.2.1, referenced the figure for the organization charts being removed from TS and has been revised to define the requirements l
that were identified by these charts.
On the basis of its review of the above items, the staff concludes that the i
licensee has provided an acceptable response to these items as addressed in the NRC guidance on removing organization charts from the administrative control requirements of the TS.
Furthermore, the staff finds that these changes are consistent with the staff's generic finding on the accepta-j bility of such changes as noted in Generic Letter 88-06. Accordingly, the staff finds the proposed changes to be acceptable.
The staff has also reviewed the following licensee proposed changes to TS Section 6.0, Administrative Controls:
Change " Director - Training" to read " Manager - Training (BSEP)."
f Change "Vice President - Brunswick Nuclear Project" to read " Manager -
Brunswick Nuclear Project."
Change "Vice President - Corporate Nuclear Safety and Research" to read "Vice President - Nuclear Services."
Change '" Chairman / President and Chief Executive Officer" to read
" Chairman / President."
Change " Executive Vice Presider.t - Power Supply and Engireering and l
Construction" to read " Executive Vice President - Power Supply."
Add
" Senior Vice President - Nuclear Generation".
Change " Director-QA/QC" to read " Manager - QA/QC" Remove " Director - Administrative Support" from the list of Plant Nuclear l
Safety Conenittee members, and the quorum requirement to be adjusted accordinoly.
L Change " Director - Regulatory Compliance" to read " Manager - Regulatory L
Compliance."
Change " Assistant to Plart General Manager" to read " Technical Assistant to Plant General Manager."
Change title " Performance Evaluation ll nit (PEU)" in Sections 6.5.5 and 6.10.2 to read " Quality Assurance Auditing Unit (QAAU)."
Revise Technical Specification 6.5.4.9, item e to become new 6.5.4.9 items e, f, and g, and " events requiring 24-hour written notification" to " reportable events" as required by 10 CFR 50.72 and 10 CFR 50.73.
7 c.
~
m 4
The staff finds that:
i (1) Job titles for certain plant and corporate renagers were changed as the results of a recent CP&L organizational change; however, their duties and qualfications remain the sar.e as before.
(2) Reducing the quorum of the Plant Nuclear Safety Committee (PHSC) by two norters will not change the function of the PNSC and, therefore, will L
not affect the nergin of safety.
The technical expertise within the PNSC remains the sane as before.
(3) Updating of TS section 6.5.4.9 to reflect the current 10 CFP, 50.72 and 10 CFR 50.73 reporting requirements will not affect the margin of safety.
This change will supersede the old rcquirement of 24-hour written notification.
(4)
Certain TS pages were updated to reflect the issuance of Anendnents 131 and 134 for Brunswick Unit I and Ahendrents 161,104 and 168 for Brunswick Unit 2.
These anen&ents revised Section 6.0 of the TS by adding recuirenents regarding:
(1) the Core Operating Limits Report, (2) the incireration of waste oil, and (3) the maximum expanded operating domain (Unit 2 only).
L Eecause of the above findings, the staff has concluded that the proposed changes to the PSEP Technical Specification Section 6.0 and updating of TS section 6.5.4.9 are acceptable.
3.0 ENVIRONilDITAL C0l'EIDERATIONS These anen&ents as requested by CP&L letter dated April 28,1989, and updated by CP&L letter dated November 16, 1989, relate to changes in recordkeeping, or administrative procedures or requirenents.
Accordingly,
these anendnents meet the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(10).
Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environrental inpact statenent or environnental assessnent need be prepared in connection with the issuance of these amendments.
4.0 CONCLUSION
The Connission made a propcsed determination that this amendment involves no significant hazards consideration which was published in the Federal Register (54 FR 25368) on June 14, 1989. The Coninission consulted with the State of North Carolina.
No public comrents were received, and the State of North Carolina did nct have any contrents. Tht. !!ovember 16, 1989, letter provided minor changes that did not change the inital determination of no significe.nt hazard consideration as published in the Federal Register.
g+.
u
~
,a m.
i i
-b-i On the basis of the considerations discussed above, the staff concludes that:
(1) there is reasonable assurance that the he61th and safety of the public will not be encangered by operation in the proposed manner, (2) such activities will be conductea in compliance with the Consnission's regulations, and.(3) the issuance of the amencaents will rst be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the peblic.
Principal Contributors:
Thomas G. Dunning Ngoc B. Le Dated:
January 3,1990 I
1 J
c
. AMENDMENT NO.138 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR BRUNSWICK, UNIT 1 AMENDMENT NO.170 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR BRUNSWICK, UNIT 2 4
Local PDR i
PDII-1 Reading
$. Varga.(14E4)
G. Lainas i
E.:Adensam P. Anderson E. Tourigny N. Le 4
L.Spessard (MNBB 3701)
)
OGC '
1 D..Hagan(MNBB3302)
E. Jordan (MNBB3302)-
)
B. Grimes l
T.H111(8)(9A2)
W. Jones (P-130A))
(P1-137 l
1 J. Calyo -(11F23) i I
T. Gody (10A19) l
-T. Dunning'(11F-23)
ACRS(10)
GPA/PA ARM /LFMB cc: Licensee / Applicant Service List
[
't 9
?
l.
8 9
5 I
.