ML20196J802
| ML20196J802 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Sequoyah  |
| Issue date: | 12/07/1998 |
| From: | NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20196J788 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9812110029 | |
| Download: ML20196J802 (2) | |
Text
+W*%q p
- a UNITED STATES g
j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 2
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20086 0001 p
- +
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO 240 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-77 AND AMENDMENT NO.230 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-79 TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY SEQUOYAH NUCLEAR PLANT. UNITS 1 AND 2 1
DOCKET NOS. 50-327 AND 50-323
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The Tennessee Valley Authority (WA) requested amendments to Operating Licenses DPR-77 and DPR-79 for Sequoyah Nuclear Plant (SON), Units 1 and 2, respectively, in a letter to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) dated September 20,1996. The amendments would clarify the types of work shifts that are acceptable when considering the requirements to ensure that heavy use of overtime is not used routinely by unit staff. The current "8-hour day" criterion in Technical Specification (TS) 6.2.2.g will be expanded to include 10-hour and 12-hour allowances in addition to the 8-shifts currently specified, in addition, the "40-hour week" criterion is changed to a " nominal 40-hour week" to provide the necessary flexibility associated with the use of the proposed shift durations.
2.0 BACKGROUND
This change is a clarification of the existing requirement to ensure that overtime is not heavily used on a routine basis during shift coverage by unit personnel who perform safety-related functions. Personnel that perform these types of functions may have varying shift durations that maintain the intent to work a basic 40-hour work week. The use of 8-hour,10-hour, or 12-hour shift durations are needed to allow the flexibility to facilitate shift schedu!es that are used at SQN. The revision to a nominal 40-hour week criteria provides a limit that accommodates the Vork-week durations that can result from various unit staff shifts.
3.0 EVALUATION Section 6.2.2.g of the SQN TSs provides the controls and limitations to maintain adequate shift coverage without routine heavy use of overtime. These requirements apply to unit staff who perform safety-related functions. These changes are clarifications that are not intended to change the existing requirements, but provide a better understanding of acceptable methods that ensure overtime usage will not be abused. The revised provisions will continue to ensure that overtime will not be heavily used on a routine basis by unit staff that perform safety-related functions.
9812110029 981207 PDR ADOCK 05000327 P
PGt
2 l
The staff promulgated its policy regarding nuclear power plant staff working hours on June 15, 1982, as an attachment to Generic Letter (GL) 82-12. The policy states, in part, "the objective is to have operating personnel work a normal 8-hour day,40-hour-week while the plant is operating." The staff recogn zes that TVA has implemented a 12-hour shift schedule and that 12-hour shift schedules do not result directly in 40-hour work weeks. Nevertheless, a nominal 40-hour week is an appropriate objective as an approximate average to be attained over a full-shift rotation (i.e., a 5-6 week shift schedule designed in accordance with other guideline limits in the policy). Such an objective provides assurance that shift schedules are designed in a manner consistent with the general intent of the policy, which is to assure that, to the extent practicable, personnel are not assigned to shift duties while in a fatigued condition that would significantly reduce their mental alertness or their decision making ability. The current SON shift schedule is consistent with the intent of the policy. In fact, the improved Standard TSs (NUREG-1431) a!!ow for either an 8-hour or a 12-hour shift schedule.
Based on its review, the NRC staff concludes that the proposed amendments to the SON TSs are consistent with the NRC working hour policy as indicated in GL 81-12, are contistent with i
NUREG-1431, and are, therefore, acceptable.
l
4.0 STATE CONSULTATION
i in accordance with the Commission's regulations, the Tennessee State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendments. The State official had no comments.
5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
These amendments relate to changes in record keeping or administrative procedures or requirements. Accorriingly, the amendments meet the eligibility criteria fcr 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 l
the amendments.
6.0 CONCLUSION
The Commission has concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that: (1) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed rnanner, (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations, and (3) the issuance of the amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
1 Principal Contributor: R. Hernan Dated: Decater 7,1998
.