ML18089A164
| ML18089A164 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Salem  |
| Issue date: | 04/20/1983 |
| From: | Berkley J, Fry L, Gueller J Public Service Enterprise Group |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML18089A163 | List: |
| References | |
| RTR-NUREG-0737, RTR-NUREG-737 GL-82-33, PROC-830420, NUDOCS 8306020240 | |
| Download: ML18089A164 (19) | |
Text
SALEM GENERATING STATION .
Title:
___E_ME OPERATIONS DEPARTMENT DOCUMENT APPROVAL COVER SHEET*
....._R_GE_N
__ c_Y__o_P_E_RA
__T_IN_G
__P_R_o_c_E_D_u__ s __
RE__ G_EN_E__ RA
__T_ro_N---PA--CK_A
__G_E__________-J 0
No. : ___N...,/;...;A-.._ _
Remarks:
Onit:
1 & 2 Initial issue of package to describe _preparation of Rev.:
-*-----------~
Emergency Operating Procedures. Twenty pages of text and eleven attachments.
Safety Related Review (Ref. AD-13):
Author's Checklist Comp~ete4:
S/R yes yes _ _x__
no _ _ x ___.
An~r---f,.._._,~i._.& .....wig,~illli6ili~~__..;,,....___ t.//rt/g:J Date I I I N/A .* Date SRO--------------.-..*---------------------
- ~. ~Jk
~
Ops. Enq*--~~--....-/-J _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
- ~ Mqr~/A:t ~:J Date Date QA N/A Date SORc** N/A Date General Manaqer ** tiS hu~~J_ Date
- required for SPM documents only
- + required ft?~ EOP validation accept~ce only
\
EMERGENCY OPERATING PROCEDURES GENERATION PACKAGE --
\
Rev. O
- TABLE OF CONTENTS TITLE PAGE 1.0 Introduction 1 2.0 Technical and Administrative Guidelines, and Procedures Preparation 3 3.0 Author's Guide 8 4.0 Verification Program 8 5.0 Validation Program 10 6.0 Training Program 17 7.0 References 19 Attachments EOP Development Program Schedule Administrative Directive 1, Changes to Station Documents, Rev. 4 Administrative Directive 2, Author's Guide for Operations Department Documents, Rev. 2 Administrative Directive 4, Typist Guide, Rev. 1 Administrative Directive 6, Operations Department Standard Abbreviations List, Rev. 3 F EOP/ERG Comparison Record G EOP Validation Record H Administrative Directive 3, Document Control, Rev. 5 I Administrative Directive 5, SPM Two Year Review, Rev. 1 J EOP/ERG/EI Cross Index List K Administrative Procedure 4, Station Operations
- Review Committee, Rev. 7 Rev. O
- EMERGENCY OPERATING PROCEDURES GENERATION PACKAGE
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 This Emergency Operating Procedures (EOP) Generation Package describes the EOP development program used at the Salem Generating Station for Unit 1 and Unit 2.
Units 1 and 2 are Westinghouse pressurized water reactor plants.
1.2 This document has been prepared to meet the guidance provided in NUREG-0899 (Reference 1.1.8.) and to respond
.to USNRC Generic Letter Number 82-33, Item 7.2.6 (page
- 15) of Supplement 1 to NUREG-0737.
1.3 Section 7.0 lists all plant-specific and general guidance publications used in the overall EOP effort.'
1.4 The EOP development effort includes the phases described briefly below. Attachment A details the EOP Development Program Schedule from the Preparation phase effort through the distribution phase.
1.4.1 Phase A-- Development of Administrative Guidelines: This phase is the preparation, review, approval, and implementation of Operations Department Administrative Directives necessary to control the EOP development effort.
Hence the purview of these directives is the whole EOP program including procedures preparation, approval, and control room implementation. Additional information regarding this phase is provided in Section 2.1.
1.4.2 Phase B-- Development of Technical Guidelines:
During this phase, Salem technical data (e.g.
setpoints and operating parameters) are combined with the Westinghouse Owner's Group Emergency_
Response Guidelines (ERGs) to produce Salem's plant specific ERGs. Additional informat~on regarding this phase is provided in Section 2.2.
1.4.3 Phase c-- EOP Preparation: This is the writing phase of Salem EOPs based on the administrative and technical guidelines developed in Phases A and B. Deviations from the ERGs, which are required to make them plant* specific, are documented as part of the procedure history.
Additional information regarding this phase is provided in Section 2.3 *
- Salem Unit 1/2 1 Rev. O
EOP Gen Pkg
- 1.4.4 Phase D-- EOP Verification: This is an independent administrative and technical review of the EOPs. Additional information regarding this phase is provided in Section 4.0.
1.4.5 Phase E-- EOP Validation: - This is an evaluation applied to determine, through demonstration, that the EOPs can be successfully executed and are adequate to mitigate the accidents and transients that would require their implementation.
Additional information regarding this phase is provided in Section 5.0.
1.4.6 Phase F-- EOP Training: This includes the development of training material, a basis document for use in training the licensed operators in the use of the EOPs and the background information that led to their development. Furthermore, this phase includes classroom and simulator training for each licensed operator. Additional information regarding this phase is provided in Section 6.0.
1.4.7 Phase G-- EOP Approval and Distribution: This
- 1.5 phase provides for the approval of each EOP by th~ Station Management and its subsequent distribution. Additional information regarding
~FINITIONS this phase is provided in Section ?.4.
1.5.l Author's Guide-- A document that provides instructions on writing EOPs, and other documents emphasizing the incorporation of human factors principles, grammar, and consistency of style.
- 1. 5. 2 Emergency Response Guide*lines (ERGs) -- Technical guidelines that provide sound engineering bases for the development of EOPs.
1.5.3 Emergency Operating Procedures (EOPs)-- Plant procedures directing operator actions necessary
\ to mitigate the consequences of transients and
.accidents that cause plant parameters to exceed Reactor Protection System setpoints, Engineered Safety Feature setpoints,
- and/ or other '*
appropriate technical limits:-*-.. . . .,
- Salem Unit 1/2
\
2 Rev. 0
\
EOP Gen Pkg
- 1.5.4 Procedures Development Team-- An interdisciplinary group attached to the Operations Department to prepare plant-specific EOPs for Salem. This team includes persons with experience in Westinghouse plant operations, classroom and simulator training, technical writing and editing, and human factors engineering.
1.5.5 Verification-- The evaluation performed to ensure that.EOPs are written in accordance with the Author's Guide and to ensure that the generic and plant-specific administrative and technical aspects have been properly incorporated.
1.5.6 Validation-- The evaluation performed to determine that the actions specified in the procedure can be performed by the operating crew in order to manage emergency conditions~
2.0 PLANT-SPECIFIC ADMINISTRATIVE AND TECHNICAL GUIDELINES AND EOP PREPARATION 2.1 Plant-Specific Administrative Guidelines
- NUREG-0899. provides guidance for the establishment of various administrative controls for EOP development (Reference 7.1.8). The administrative controls provide the preparation methodology requirements; controls over the verification and validation process; and the controls over the approval, distribution, and ongoing maintenance processes. As such, the guidelines have been followed. However, the administrative controls prepared for the EOP development effort are incorporated into exisiting Operation Department Adminstrative Directives rather than establishing stand-alone controls just for the EOPs. The EOP-related administrative controls established at Salem are briefly discussed below.
2.1.1 Preparation Methodology Requirement~
Specific administrative controls that govern EOP preparation activities have been developed and implemented at Salem. The major activities are writing, word processing, and initial reproduction for review efforts. A detailed description of the preparation effort is provided in Section 2.3 .of .this document. To facilitate
- Salem Unit 1/2 3 Rev. O
EOP Gen Pkg
- NRC evaluation of these specific EOP-related administrative controls, the following documents*
have been attached toi. this EOP Generation Package for review:
- a. Attachment B-- Administrative Directive 1, Changes to Station Documents.
- b. Attachment c-- Administrat;ive Directive 2, Author's Guide for Operations Department Documents.
- c. Attachment D-- Administrative Directive 4, Typist Guide.
- d. Attachment E-- Administrative Directive 6, Operations Department Standard Abbreviations.
~.... -*~ . 2.1.1 Verification and Validation -Process Controls Administrative controls govern the EOP verification and validation process at Salem.
The major activities are verification of quantitative values, verification of difference~
between the generic ERGs and the Salem design, the independent review .Process, and the validation of the procedure itself. A detailed description of the verification and validation processes is provided in Sections 4.0 and 5.0, respectively. To facilitate NRC evaluation of thes*e specific .EOP-related administrative controls, the following documents have been attached:
- a. Attachment B-- Administrative Directive 1, Changes to Station Documents-.-
- b. ~Attachment F-- EOP/ERG Comparison Record (Sample).
- c. Attachlnent G-- EOP Validation Record (Sample) *
- Salem Unit 1/2 4 Rev. O
EOP Gen Pkg
- 2.1.3 Approval and Distribution Controls Administrative controls* govern the EOP approval and distribution activities at Salem. A detailed description of these activities is provided in Section S.4. To facilitate NRC evaluation of these specific EOP-related administrative controls, the following documents have been attached to the EOP Generation* Package for review:
- a. Attachment B-- Administrative Directive 1, Changes to Station Documents.
- b. Attachment H-- Administrative Directive 3 I Document Control.
2.1.4 EOP Maintenance Controls Specific administra~ive controls that govern the ongoing maintenance*of EOPs have been developed and implemented at Salem. A detailed description of this effort and the associated activities is provided in Section S.S. To facilitate NRC evaluation of these EOP-rel"ated administrative controls, a copy of Administrative Directive S, SPM Two Year Review, is included as Attachment I.
202' Plant-Specific Technical Guidelines A*s the base document, the generic Westinghouse ERGs are used to prepare plant-specific EOPs for the Salem Generating ~tation. The generic guidelines are made plant-specific by inserting plant-specific values where required and.by documenting differences between the generic ERGs and the actual EOP as it is prepared. This approach is further described in Section 2.3 of this document.
2.2.1 Plant Description-- Salem Units 1 and 2 are both Westinghouse four-loop plants with capacities greater than 3300 MWt. Each plant has_ high-head centrifugal charging pumps that are also used for safety injection. The shutoff head of these pumps is greater than the Reactor Coolant System (RCS) design pressure. Each plant also has two
____-- low-head safety injection pumps and two residual
- heat removal pumps servicing all four loops, and
- a safety inj*ection accurqulator on each loop *
- Salem Unit 1/2 5 Rev. O I
EOP Gen Pkg
- As such, the Salem Unit 1 and 2 designs are both comparable to the standard 412 plant design assumed for the development of the Westinghouse Owner's Group ERGs. Therefore, Public Service Electric and Gas Company is utilizing the HP-BASIC ERG set developed for the high pressure
\ plants. -
2.2.2 Emergency Response Guidelines-- Since the existing high pressure version of the ERGs (BASIC revision dated September 1, 1981) does not contain the improvements made to the* low pressure ERGs, current improvements from the low pressure ERGs are used until the high pressure ERGs are upgraded.
2.2.3 After the high pressure ERGs are upgraded, revised, and officially issued for use, they are to be used as the base document for preparing the*
plant-specific EOPs. (The EOPs prepared before the issuance of the revised high pressure ERGs are then compared against the high pressure ERGs and revised accordingly.)
- 2.2.4 Future revisions to the upgraded high pressure ERGs are to be reviewed and evaluated to
- determine if the plant-specific EOPs require revision. Should revisions be required, the plant-specific EOPs are revised, reviewed, verified, validated, approved, and issued in accordance with the administrative gui~elines described 'in Section 2.1.
2.3 EOP Preparation Program The Procedures Development Team prepares the plant-specific EOPs. This interdisciplinary team includes persons with experience in Westinghouse plant operations, classroom and simulator training, technical writing and editing, and human factors engineering. The objective in assigning a designate4 group to this task is twofold: to integrate the various backgrounds and experience needed in preparing EOPs, and to more
effectively coordinate the task to ensure continuity--not only in the procedure preparation effort--but throughout the verification, validation, and training prog_ram phases.
~-
- Salem Unit 1/2 6 Rev. 0
EOP Gen Pkg
- To assist the Procedures Development Team in writing the EOPs, additional personnel from the Station Administrative Staff (i.e. word processing oper.ators),
the Operations Department Staff (i.e. licensed SROs, ROs, and clerks), and Nuclear Engineering Department engineers have been assigned specific support responsibilities. The Procedures Development Team itself is attached to the Operations Department. A description of the EOP preparation program follows:
2.3.1 Emergency Response Guideline Upgrading-- The.
Nuclear Engineering Department is responsible for reviewing the draft EOP in order to verify the plant-specific setpoints and operating parameters that the Procedures Development Team obtains from the ERGs. The Nuclear Engineering Department maintains documentation supporting the quantitative values.
2.3.2 Draft Procedure Preparation-- Procedure writers use upgraded ERGs to prepare drafts of each identified EOP in accordance with Administrative Directives 2 and 6 (refer to Attachments C and E)
- Attachment J provides a listing of the projected EOPs ,* and a cross *reference to indicate whi~h ERGs and Station Emergency Instructions are covered by each EOP. In preparing the drafts, the procedure writers will also perform a comparative analysi~ between the EOPs as drafted and the applicable ERGs and document the* * ~*-*- ..
differences (refer-. to Attachment F)
- I . ~
2.3.3 Word Processing-- Each EOP 'draft is submitted to the Station Administrative Staff for word processing in accordance with Administrative Directive 4 to ensure consistent format (refer to Attachment D)
- 2.3.4. Preliminary Review-- The procedure writers and editor perform a preliminary r~view of each typed draft EOP to ensure that they are ready for verification. This review, although basic, provides for the proofreading and checks each EOP against the requirements of the plant-specific Author's Guide and Typist Guide *
- Salem Unit 1/2 7 Rev. 0
EOP Gen Pkg
- 2.3.5 Upon receipt of a typed draft EOP, the Operations Department Staff prepares the procedure for verification and review. The Operations Department then distributes it in accordance with Administrative Directive 1, supplied here as Attachment B. (Also, refer to Section 4. 2)
- 3.0 AUTHOR'S GUIDE FOR EOPs The Salem plant-specific Author's Guide, which addresses all Operations Department documents, establishes sound procedure writing principles to be applied consistently by all Salem EOP writers and/or editors. The guide is based on the "Emergency Operating Procedures Writing Guideline" (INPO 82-017), developed by the Emergency Operating Pro~edures Implementation Assistance (EOPIA) Review Group. This guide is revised, as necessary, based on verification a~d validation feedback.
3.1 The Salem Author's Guide and other editorial information are included in the following attachments:
3.1.1 Attachment C--Administrative Directive 2, Author's Guide for Operations Department
- 3.1.2 3.1.3 Documents (AD-2)
Attachment D--Administrative Directive 4, Typist Guide (AD-4)
Attachment E--Administrative Directive 6, "-...._
Operations Department Approved Abbreviations List (AD-6) 4.0 EOP VERIFICATION PROGRAM The verification program activities are coordinated by the Procedures Development Team. However, the procedure verification reviews themselves are performed by personnel attached to the Salem Generating Station staff but independent of the Procedures Development Team. The only independent verification reviews conducted by the Procedures Development Team pertain to the plant-specific setpoints and*
operating parameters provided by the Nuclear Engineering Department and the reviews of written procedures to ensure
- compliance with the Author's Guide. The EO¥ verification process is described in and controlled by Administrative Directive 1 (refer to Attachment B) *
- Salem Unit 1/2 8 Rev. O
\
\
EOP Gen Pkg
- 4.1 Operations Staff Review The Operations Department Staff prepares each EOP .for verification review. In doing so, the Senior Operations Supervisor (or his designee) conducts a review of each procedure before issuing it for the reviews discussed in Sections 4.2 through 4.4. The purpose of this staff review is to check each procedure for conf orruan~e to the applicable administrative guidelines, to ensure the incorporation of current, pertinent design changes of which the procedure writers may have been unaware, and to ensure that the validation method recommended by the author is appropriate based on the criteria specified in Administrative Directive 1 (refer to Attachment B)
- When satisfied, the Senior Operations Supervisor shall, in accordance with Administrative Directive 1, issue each procedure for further review. (Also, refer to following Section 4.2).
4.2 Senior Reactor Operator/Shift Personnel Review Each EOP is sent to a licensed Senior Reactor Operator (SRO) for the first-level verification review. Although not mandatory, PSE&G prefers to assign this review to either a Senior Shift Supervisor or Shift Supervisor when available. The assigned SRO is responsible for performing the verification review in accordance with the criteria specified in Administrative Directive 1 .-
<(refer t9 Attachment B). It is the procedure writer's responsibility to resolve review comments.
In addition to the SRO review, Operations Shift Personnel have the opportunity to acquaint themselves with the EOPs before implementation in the form of an unofficial general review. Their comments are reviewed.
As before, the procedure writers are responsible for resolving review comments.
4.3 Operating Engineer Review Each EOP is sent to the Operating Engineer for the second-level verification review. This review is conducted in accordance with the criteria specified in Administrative Directive 1 (refer to Attachment B) * -~
Again, the procedure writers are responsible for resoiv~ng review comments .
- Salem* Un*i t 1/2 9 Rev. 0
EOP Gen Pkg
- 4.4 Operations Manager Review Although the Operations Manager is not expected to directly participate in the verification review, he may be called upon to resolve conflicting comments among reviewers should the procedure writers be unable to do so. Therefore, all pertinent review comments are reviewed, evaluated, and resolved by either the procedure writers or the Operations Manager before verification is completed.
5.0 EOP VALIDATION PROGRAM The Nuclear Regulatory Commission, through the issuance and implementation of NUREG-0737, Supplement 1 to NUREG 0737, and NUREG-0899, has established a requirement for "Human.
factored, function oriented, emergency operating procedures" that "improve human reliability" and "mitigate the
*-***-** ____ c()p,~equences" of plant failures and operator errors.
The Westinghouse Owners Group, has written.an~ validated generic ERGs for owners of the high pressure versions of its Nuclear Steam Supply Systems. These guidelines have been promulgated as the base documents for development of the plant-specific EOPs. The owners group distributed information concerning the process used for* validation of ERGs. In addition to the material produced by the NRC and Westinghouse, INPO has issued an EOP writing and implementation Validation Program Guide. All of the documents referenced thus far in Section 5.0 have been reviewed, and the appropriate elements have been incorporated into the.Salem EOP VaI"i'dation Program.
The EOPs developed for the Salem plant duplicate the Westinghouse ERGs to the greatest extent practicable.
The elements of the Validation Program are presented in Sections 5.1 through 5.3. The beginning of the Validation phase overlaps the conclusion of the Verification phase.
Validation starts during Operations Manager approval and well before the Training phase begins. (Refer to Attachment A, EOP Development Program Schedule).
5.f Validation Objectives 5.1.1 General Objective-- The general objective of Validation is to ensure that the operator using the procedures can mitigate the consequences of an accident or transient condition in a timely manner and place the plant in a safe and stable condition *
- Salem Unit 1/2 10 Rev. O
EOP Gen Pkg
- 5.1.2 Specific Objectives-- The specific objectives of the program are to verify the following:
- a. The procedures direct operators to achieve the desired plant condition.
- b. The procedures communicate to operators as a unified, efficient system. That is, each major plant transient should be an entry condition for a procedure, and each procedure should end in a stable plant condition or with entry into a procedure that continues to move toward stable conditions.
- c. The procedures as a whole are not circulatory or repetitive.
- d. Each procedure can be used by operators without hesitation and without reference to non-procedural information.
- e. Execution of a procedure does not require the operator to perform excessive travel around: the control room *
- f. The procedures do not require an operator to perform more than one task simultaneously or perform steps that conflict or cancel.
- 5.2 Validation Resources 5.2.1 General--'The resources available for the validation process include those commonly available: to most utilities including engineering data, prints, technical manuals, plant equipment, office space, office equipment and supplies, and a pool of operationally experienced and technically knowledgeable personnel. The Salem plant has the added advantage of a plant-specific simulator which can be used to run accident and transi~nt scenarios in real time and measure the effectiveness of procedure steps in controlling plant. 'response *
- Salem.unit 1/2 11 Rev. 0
EOP Gen Pkg
- 5.2.2 Personnel-- The majority of the validation tasks are performed by or under the guidance of the Procedures Development Team reporting to the Operations Department. Refer to Sections*' .1. 5. 4 or 2.3 for a description of this team. The, team has no concurrent or conflicting duties and is responsible for completion of EOP Validation~.
Other personnel :i.n~rolved in the validation process and the nature of their involvement are as follows:
- a. Licensed Operators-- Walk-through,
- talk-through, and perform EOPs to verify technical accuracy.
- b. Training Staff-- Support the preparation and operation of the simulator during* the validation effort.
5c2.3 Equipment-- The plant equipment, the Salem control room, and the Salem plant simulator are availab~e for EOP validation. Use of the plant equipment and control room is limited to walk-throughs or talk-throughs. Performance
- validation, when used, is limited to simulator reP..lication of plant performance. As an option, it may be possible for some procedures or portions of procedures to be validated by actual performance on the plant equipment although this is not anticipated. Validation of a procedure actually using plant equipment is *based on a thorough review of the procedure in question and the existing plant conditions.* Validation by performance using plant equipment is under the strict control of the Operations Manager or his designee.
5.3 Validation Process 5.3.1 Methodology-- Although there is a preponderance of information on validating EOPs, the general areas of validation appear to be consistent as follows:
- a. Technical Validity-- The adherence of the procedure* to the proper plant equipment, proper operating locations, correct sequence, correct operating steps, and conformance to actuat plant response; also termed Technical Correctness/Compatibility *
- Salem Unit 1/2 12 Rev. 0
EOP Gen Pkg
- b. Human Factors Validity-- Each procedure is readable, intelligible, and usable. There is easy access to appended information, which is easily identified. Each procedure should minimize control room travel and avoid wordiness, repetition, and cyclical commands. (Also termed level of detail/understandability.)
Deviations from the ERGs are documented as part of the Verification phase and credit for
- validation is taken for those procedures that conform to the ERGs in content, initial conditions, ending conditions, -and procedural sequence. Those procedures that conform to the
.ERGs for these items are considered to be technically valid.
During the Validation phase, each EOP is practiced through. one of the following techniques or a combination of them. Procedure content determines which techniques are used.
(1) Talk-through of all or part of the procedure.
(2) Walk-through of all or part of the procedure in control room or-on simulator.
(3) Performance on the simulator.
(4) Performance in the control room.
(5) A combination of the above steps.
In addition, each block of EOPs (e.g. all TRIP procedures make one block) is reveiwed as a set.
The integration of procedure steps within a block and th.e interfaces with *other blocks of EOPs are examined. This is performed by operationally experienced personnel to ensure integration.
(Refer to Section 5.3.2, a).
5.3~2 Evaluation Criteria-- The evaluation criteria for each of the validation steps discussed in Methodology is detailed in the following paragraphs. Documentation of the evaluation results is discussed in Se.ction 5. 3. 3 *
- Salem Unit 1/2 13 Rev. 0
EOP Gen Pkg
- ao Integration-- Review by operationally experienced personnel.
(1) Each procedure brings the plant to a safe and stable condition or directs the user to another procedure that brings the plant to a safe and stable condition.
(2) Procedures individually, as a block, and as a whole do not require conflicting activities for control of the same accident or transient.
(3) Procedures individually, as a block, and as a whole are not circulatory or repetitive.
- b. Criteria for the actual or simulated performance of the procedures.
(1) Can the procedure be performed in the sequence specified?
- (2)
(3)
Can the procedure be performed with a minimum of hesitation or confusion?
Can the procedure be performed without the aid. of additional supportive material?
(4) Can the desired result be obtained without adding or deleting steps?
(5) Assuming the procedure steps are performed correctly, are the desired /
results obtained?
5.3.3 Documentation-- Documentation is performed for each step of the Validation phase. In establishing the documentation requirements, the concept of Management.by Exception is used: if a procedure is successfully validated, no .
documentation is supplied beyond specifying the initial conditions for validation (the ending conditions were of course as predicted by the procedure)
- Deviations from specified conditions are documented and resolved *
- Salem Unit 1/2 14 Rev. 0
EOP Gen Pkg
- 5.3.4 Resolution of Deficiencies-- This refers to the responsibility of the individuals performing the validation to document deviations from expected or desired results. Personnel validating the EOPs and operations staff (including the Procedure Development Team) resolves deficiencies. The Operations Manager or his designee resolves all deficiencies not settled by the operations staff and the Procedure Development Team. Ultimate responsibility for acceptance of EOPs including deficiency resolutions lies with the Station Operations Review Committee (SORC)
- a. Operations Manager-- After acceptable validation, each EOP is subject*to the review and approval of the Operations Manager. This review and approval is required before training the operators on
.. revised as a result of input received during
- the Training phase, the EOP will be reverified, *revalidated, and again reviewed and.approved by the Operations Manager if the Senior Operations Supervisor deems it necessary.
- b. Quality Assurance-- Since they are safety-related procedures, each EOP approved by the Operations Manager is subject to an independent review by Station Quality Assurance and must be approved by the Station Quality Assurance Engineer.
- c. Station Operations Review Committee-- As a safety-related procedure, each EOP approved by the Operations Manager and the Station Quality Assurance Engineer is subject to review and approval by the SORC. This committee review and approval is conducted in accordari"ce with Station Administrative
- ---.""-Procedure 4, *Station Operations Review
'Committee (refer to Attachment K) *
- Salem Unit 1/2 15 Re-ir. 0 i
EOP Gen Pkg
- d. Assistant approval, Assistant only when General Manager-- For final each EOP is submitted to the General Manager - Salem Operations the procedure has satisfactorily completed the review and approval process described herein. Once approved by the Assistant General Manager, the procedure is ready for distribution and implementation.
5.4.2 EOP Distribution and Control Process-- When each EOP *is approved for issu~nce, the distribution is controlled in accordance with Administrative Directive 3 (refer to Attachment H) *
- a. Senior Operations Supervisor-- Upon receiving an approved EOP, the Senior Operations Supervisor is responsible for making it ready for distribution by the Operations Clerical Staff. Basically, he transfers approval process information from- .. ,.
the Operations Department Document Approval Cover Sheet to the Operations Department Document Distribution Form, provides special directions, and indicates the appropriate distribution. Then, the approved EOP and supporting paperwork is given to the Operations Clerical Staff.
- b. Operations Clerical Staff-- Upon receiving an approved EOP, the Operations Clerical Staff completes the distribution process through issuance of the EOP for use. The Operations Clerical Staff updates indices, stamps documents as required, reproduces the EOPs, distributes copies, ensures that copies are received and used, and maintains the records of the review, approval, and distribution process. The newly prepared EOPs are issued as a complete set to facilitate implementation and to avoid confusion. When this set is issued, the set of Emergency Instructions that are currently in use are superseded and withdrawn *
- Salem Unit 1/2 16 Rev. 0